Thanks for reading my funding requests. Always exciting to enter “new terriroties” (funding request for open source work) and get feedback on such
FYI: I do not use Neos CMS in my active work, but have been a part of the Phoenix/Flow/Neos community since the project/rewrite started. I do use the Flow framework in my everyday non-cms based work tasks.
Lower the entry barrier
Usable for a larger number of projects that need small HTTP framework with a (M)VC stack as requirement
(Even) easier extensibility
And other points covered in the thread linked to, from when the proposal was originally presented.
Note, that it’s 22k for all package. The splitting of Doctrine is 15k. The others two are follow up tasks that will have to be done anyway. But with funding stuff floats easier, like most things here in life
The “CR Rewrite” is not more special than any other funding request - it’s part of the same voting process and has “no benefits” that secures it any funding.
You mean “Neos” as a brand or “Neos” as the CMS platform? For the “Flow” product of the Neos community I listed a few in the top of this response. For “Neos” as the “CMS Platform” build on Flow, it’s a way to get a larger userbase for the Framework and hence a larger community to contribute to it.
I think Flow itself won’t be able to grow the user base substantially. Laravel has a great framework, really good documentation, super readable source code, and a big ecosystem of tutorials, packages and tooling. Flow will not be able to effectively compete here.
While Flow is a good framework, I think the USP and the driving force is Neos. You are right, CR is a normal funding request. For me it’s much more important.
Just so we are clear: Neos is the brand/organization name. Neos CMS is a product build on top of the Neos Flow Framework. No Flow, No CMS.
Not taking care of Neos Flow is like not taking care of your legs as long as your arms work.
And for me - not using Neos CMS and the CR - the Neos Flow Framework is more important That’s why i submitted my proposals based on what I’ve seen and tested in the wild.
We are many different people seeing and using Neos. And I don’t find it fair to shoot down funding requests here in the general thread. Feel free to ask questions in the threads that can shed some light on the topics. I will happily respond to any questions posted on the funding requests
I’m not shutting down anything. I did not remove nor close your funding request. I wrote my opinion (“For me it’s much more important”).
And yes, ever time I used “Neos” in my previous post I’m referring to “Neos CMS”. I think that was clear out of the context.
It’s totally fine that you did your funding requests and as always the voting will decide. Might be that many people think it’s the most important part.
@sorenmalling Thanks a lot for putting all the effort into the really elaborate and thought out funding requests.
I agree that we should refrain from criticizing funding requests in this thread.
Of course we should be able to challenge requests in their respective threads (or by asking the author directly) but IMO the main purpose of the budget voting is to find our priorities – if you don’t agree with a request, just don’t vote for it.
yes, they are totally outdated and I feel really bad for showing that page… I currently don’t have the time within our team to automate that further, because a lot of manual work is currently required to keep that page up to date.
And there is a weird difference in the numbers, that I haven’t taken the time yet to track down.
So thinking about this as I write this response, it’s probably better to take the wrong information down…
The Konsensierung for the budget proposals for the remainder of 2019 is votable by active team members (link in internal chat) - I hope I got all proposals. Please do not submit suggestions in the tool, but post it here if I missed a funding request!
Voting (aka “rating”) start at noon CEST today and is open for 1 week. Remember that your rating indicates how much resistance you have for a specific option.
as I’ve already done most of this work without a budget and don’t find it fair to come with a invoice afterwards and comments in the threads suggest good pointers on how to complete it.
The withdrawal has no impact on the other [Flow Light] tasks.
the voting from the team is in. Total to be spent: ~ 20k€ (28k€ - 2 releases at 4k each).
As far as I read it, everyone who voted was for the Event Sourced Content Repository. So my interpretation is, that we should give that proposal the full budget they asked for (15k€) and the remainder goes to the ES index per language proposal (4k€). Any strong objections to this interpretation?
Thank you to everyone who put in their time and effort to submit a proposal. Even if yours was not voted for this time, please consider bringing it up again for the next budget!
Maybe we could find another way for some proposals. For instance the Flow Welcome Package and Resource Management without Database is an awesome idea.
@sorenmalling what do you think about a little kickstarter or startnext … I would like to see that happen as well and think to it can be also interesting for agencies.
I can only say that I would like to support such proposals also with extra donations.
Just a (very late) thought: will we have enough funds to shut down the CIC and start the e.V.?
And for next year (when the e.V. is in place) we need to save some funds in order to pay out Flownative’s costs regarding the trademark. But we are flexible there regarding the timing.
What exactly does “2 releases at 4k each” mean now? The year is over and there won’t be another major release this year. The minor in December needs not that much work, but the 5.0/6.0 pair was quite time-consuming.
I do not yet know about @daniellienert, but on my timesheet alone I have 47 hours for that major release… I wonder how to handle that.
