[dojo-contributors] what is the raison detre for dojo 2.0.

Rawld Gill rgill at altoviso.com
Thu Oct 11 13:52:13 EDT 2012

This is exactly what I think. Which is also to say there is not a single class of JavaScript developer that we should not consider.

Tom's prescription for attracting mindshare of #1 seems to imply the problem that I also believe we have: we have failed to make our low-level abstractions easy to use (this is more than just a problem with docs). Because of this we have lost mindshare to other solutions that are better than ours.

If these statements are true, then Tom's prescription will (1) make dojo better for *us* to build higher-level abstractions, (2) attract "beginner" customers, some of which will grow into mid- and enterprise-level customers, and (3) increase resources available (contributors, committers, sponsors) to make Dojo better yet. In short, the upward spiral.

This discussion is not/never was about marketing. It is about what product to build. Dojo is a business with a product and customers. It competes in a space where there is lots of competition and rapid product evolution. In almost all cases, businesses competing in such spaces either spiral up or spiral down (or are too small to matter). Our decisions will decide which spiral we're on. That's why this is an important discussion.


From: dojo-contributors-bounces at mail.dojotoolkit.org [mailto:dojo-contributors-bounces at mail.dojotoolkit.org] On Behalf Of Tom Trenka
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 8:17 AM
To: dojo dev.
Subject: Re: [dojo-contributors] what is the raison detre for dojo 2.0.

As far as I can tell, our target audiences have not changed since DTK's inception, and I don't see how changing that audience will help for a raison d'etre for 2.0.  That being said, here's some practical reasons I think (and sorry but I'm getting into a little bit of features again, sorry in advance) 2.0:

Target audiences (not necessarily in this order):
1) Enterprise web app developers
2) Beginners looking to do quick progressive enhancements on a per-page basis
3) Mid-level developers looking to incorporate pieces into an app or page (think a site that maybe needs one dgrid, that kind of thing).

We do well with the first audience but have not done so good with the other two.

To attract mindshare for #2, I think we need to go through the current core, pull out all of the cruft, and simplify some basic APIs by making them consistent and ridiculously easy to use.  This is the reason I'm pushing for replacing our DOM creation/manipulation API with put-selector; I'd also like to consider the idea of attaching .byId right to dojo/query, so that we don't need dojo/dom.  From there, we could create something similar to put-selector for style manipulation, and possibly measurement things (aka position/coords/whatever the flavor is).

Though I haven't tried it yet, dojo/Request and dojo/Promise both look to be very powerful but dead-simple to use, and should probably go in as-is.

Make sure we're writing things using ES5, and force the use of ES5 Shim in environments that don't support it (aka IE).

Adopt/strengthen dojo/on and drop the IE cruft from it.

Keep dojo/declare.

I'm sure I'm missing some things but I think you all get the idea.  Streamline, simplify and shink =)

I don't consider this to be some kind of competition/war either but mindshare is mindshare, and I think a streamlined/simplified DTK 2.0 is the way to start gaining some of that mindshare back.


On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Rawld Gill <rgill at altoviso.com<mailto:rgill at altoviso.com>> wrote:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dylan Schiemann
> Ken said this perfectly... it's not that we don't need excellent marketing, it's
> that the decision for what 2.0 needs to be should be based on the needs of
> the product, not on the marketing "war".
I'm not arguing for a "marketing war". I'm arguing that we should understand our market and try to win the maximum number of customers in that market. (We should probably stop using the word "war" since it seems so loaded to some.)

I'm sorry to be a pia, but can you/anybody please give a couple of examples of things we should *not* concern ourselves with. Or, equivalently, areas where we should *not* compete.

That we need marketing says nothing. What is/is not the target market? What is/is not important to that market? The answers to those questions will tell us what needs to be done.


dojo-contributors mailing list
dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org<mailto:dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/pipermail/dojo-contributors/attachments/20121011/bd70d437/attachment.htm 

More information about the dojo-contributors mailing list