Proposal for Core Compnents (Plugins)

[andreasnrb]

I disagree. You have to give people a reason to work with others. I mean, it's not like they're getting paid here. Giving these sort of collaborative efforts a distinctive place in the system provides an incentive for people to contribute to them.

Yes but this doesn't need special names for everything. We now have extract code from core and put into core plugin, a new plugin HealthCheck that is a core plugin and a forum that is a core plugin. I have no problem with the extract from core thing. Its the rest that are problematic. I like what they discussed in wp-hackers with WP Microblog APIs etc. You should read them. That stuff can be collaborate efforts also.

Huh? Who said anything about keeping anybody away from contributing?

I was referring to plugin directory. And since the way Jane talked about it there are more core plugins to follow if this works. No clarification on the definition of "works". Even though Matt said it all was an experiment. Still not sure about what about it is experimental. There are so many parts.

People who only teach themselves have a fool for a student. ;)

Most programmers teach themselves by looking at other peoples code and messing with it.
And if they learn bad things they are looking at bad code. And WordPress has some bad code even in the glorious core.

GitHub is just a public repository. Same as Sourceforge or Google Code. None of these address the problem. Heck, almost every project I see on any of these repos have one or at most two developers. 95% of them are "dead", basically.

It is an inspiration on how you can improve the directory for collaborate use and people can see things. Not to be copied only to get ideas from. The UI, followers, more communication tools etc.

The reaction was obvious, but not because of why you think. The negative reaction mostly comes from people who monetize WordPress and who also, for whatever reason, refuse to participate in the actual process of WordPress development.

I would venture to guess that most plugin authors don't know about core plugins at all.
The SimplePress folks don't like it either and they don't monetize wordpress as far as I can tell.
I don't like and I don't make money from plugins that will ever be core plugins. Many others don't like it either.

"Groupthink" has nothing to do with it, and is a simplistic view of the actual problem.

Which problem are you referring too? Lack of listening? Bad communication? Strange choices?
Groupthink is anything but simplistic.

[Otto]

Yes but this doesn't need special names for everything.

If you want to incentivize it, then yes, it has to be a distinct thing, with a distinct place. Thus, the "distinction".

What the name is is rather irrelevant. It still has to occupy a special place in the overall system.

There are so many parts.

IMO, you're over-thinking it. It's not really all that complex. It's a simple idea with some rather obvious results.

Most programmers teach themselves by looking at other peoples code and messing with it.

That's not teaching yourself. That's being taught by other people's code.

And if they learn bad things they are looking at bad code. And WordPress has some bad code even in the glorious core.

Yes, and this is the same point I was trying to make to you in the first place.

It is an inspiration on how you can improve the directory for collaborate use and people can see things. Not to be copied only to get ideas from. The UI, followers, more communication tools etc.

As a programmer and developer for the last 24 years, 12 of those professionally, then I would say, in my considered opinion, that GitHub, Google Code, and SourceForge are prime examples of what NOT to do. Never in my life have I ever seen anything so obscure, difficult to use, and annoying as those three systems. I have intentionally NOT contributed to projects specifically because of their use.

Especially GitHub, that thing is just bloody awful. Of course, I also dislike "git" in general. It's too difficult to use and understand for the basic processes. And the plugins for integrating it into my various preferred IDEs suck.

Which problem are you referring too? Lack of listening? Bad communication? Strange choices?

The problem I refer to is people arguing against the idea of Core Plugins in the first place. People seem to be up in arms and against them for no real rational reasons. Perhaps it's bad communication, I don't really know.

Groupthink is anything but simplistic.

It's a simple and pat answer to the problem I described above. However, it's too simple. Basically, it's wrong. Groupthink didn't result in Core Plugins, there's an actual need that the idea addresses. The mere fact that you and other people don't like the idea doesn't make it the result of groupthink. You can not like an idea without assigning silly and false-to-fact labels to it like this.

[andreasnrb]

IMO, you're over-thinking it. It's not really all that complex. It's a simple idea with some rather obvious results.

There are a bunch of things involved. A number of different plugins, bbPress, Healthcheck, post by email and I think someothers are planned. Infrastructure, leadership, consequnses for directory, articles etc. Criterias for being a contributor.
Who of the current core plugin devs are not also wp core contributors? I think all of them are.
If the idea was to get more involvement you need to reach out to the rest. But we'll see what they come up with.

Yes, and this is the same point I was trying to make to you in the first place.

I just can't see how you can teach yourself to code by not looking at code.
Perhaps someone should setup a plugin code review thing. Where authors can ask for someone to review their code. Similar to what is done with landingpages and websites. Could complement the best practice thing I think I've read about them planning.

Yes, and this is the same point I was trying to make to you in the first place.

Hehe k. Didn't get that. Couldn't see the connection with student.

As a programmer and developer for the last 24 years, 12 of those professionally, then I would say, in my considered opinion, that GitHub, Google Code, and SourceForge are prime examples of what NOT to do. Never in my life have I ever seen anything so obscure, difficult to use, and annoying as those three systems. I have intentionally NOT contributed to projects specifically because of their use.

Especially GitHub, that thing is just bloody awful. Of course, I also dislike "git" in general. It's too difficult to use and understand for the basic processes. And the plugins for integrating it into my various preferred IDEs suck.

I use both SVN and Git myself I like both. Never really liked Sourceforge and haven't had much contact with Google code. It took me londer time to set up my first github respository than my svn rep though cause I couldn't get the encryptionkey generated.

It's a simple and pat answer to the problem I described above. However, it's too simple. Basically, it's wrong. Groupthink didn't result in Core Plugins, there's an actual need that the idea addresses. The mere fact that you and other people don't like the idea doesn't make it the result of groupthink. You can not like an idea without assigning silly and false-to-fact labels to it like this.

Its the behavior I'm talking about not the core plugins as such when I talk about groupthink. The decision processes, feedback, reactions, not listening etc. I would still label it groupthink even though core plugins were never introduced. Its a thing I have been thinking about for some time. Maybe its not groupthink maybe its just crappy organization, maybe its both.