Which orientation members.atilla.org should take ?
After a bit more than one year of development, members.atilla.org is a platform that is … let’s say "functional enough" in the use case of the ATILLA organization. The main goal of the platform (from ATILLA point of view) that was allowing its members to register on the organization network automatically has been reached, we have a decent code coverage, a CI, contribution guidelines, a FOSS-compliant license … basically everything to please
Now, the topic that I want to share with you is based on this question : "Should we keep members.atilla.org as an internal platform ?".
Let me explain …
From my point of view, we can decide to continue developing features that are specific to the ATILLA organization, or we can choose to widen the effective range of the project to more generic student associations.
Though we still have some cool features to develop at the moment such as #22, I think that we will soon be out of ideas regarding the development of the platform ; and not having enough things to do on the project will probably kill it (and as one of the guys that started the project, this is not my first wish to see it die).
What do you mean exactly ?
What I mean is that other student organizations (that may be part of the EISTI or not) could benefit of what has already been done on the platform (my first thought goes to E-EISTI) by simply making the platform more "generic" (ie: more easily movable from one organization to another).
What does it takes to make the platform more generic ?
Regarding the code … at most one or two template changes ; the different parts of the application were designed to be independent between each other, which means that we could totally run members.atilla.org without the
network application for example.
We will also have to search for an alternative project name.
In practice, what do you propose ?
We should keep the issues that are needed for ATILLA organization to run properly at a top priority ; but if someone has an idea for a particular feature (for example: "I want to run a survey when a user registers on the platform"), we shouldn’t ask ourselves "Can it be useful for ATILLA ?" but more "Can it be useful for a student organization ?". Therefore, we don’t have to restrict ourselves to the ATILLA use case.
But it will take too much time / effort !
Hey, it’s an Open Source and collaborative project, you don’t have to kill yourself by working on it
What are the benefits (the pros) ?
So, for me, we have a lot to gain, and a little to lose ; here are the main benefits that I see at the moment :
- For the project: if the platform is more widely usable, then it has better chances to be seen / used by others
- For you and your code: same as the project, remember that every bit of code pushed on this very repository is mirrored on GitHub and on the EISTI GitLab.
- For the organization that supports the development of the project, ATILLA.
Increased lifetime: See what I’ve described in the
What are the drawbacks (the cons) ?
I can’t find a lot of them (but my opinion is biased, of course
Let’s talk about it !
What do you think ? Is it a good or a bad idea ?
We can also talk a bit on #members, but the main opinions may have to stay on this issue
Also, don’t hesitate to
Thanks, for reading, here is a potato: