This topic is reserved for comments to | this page | which lays out the overall approach for creating the Transition Software Platform.
We've invited a specific group to make comments before we release this to the rest of the network.
If you happen to find yourself here and you're knowledgeable about these matters, please feel free to add your own thoughts.
Thanks Ben - couple of very minor comments - type in intro ("eachother"), not sure how you measure honorability (?) re Tudor one of most honorable.
Re the substance - it seems logical to me, but pretty rapid (particularly given voluntary basis of all of this) - and how much additional work will it be for you to collate etc?
Peter
Hi
I'd like to pledge any support I can give you to in building a software platform for the transition network. Having been involved in building www.ethical-junction.org over the last 3 years our team has learnt a lot about what it means to build a collaborative platform that can contain a growing community.
Get in touch if you want to chat.
I've alerted our Tech Director, Ket Majumudar about this forum.
Something I think is really imporant to provide is a marketplace for the network to use to make best use of all the "stuff" we have all already got!
Great idea! My only comment so far is that the time frames look a bit tight.
Hi Everyone,
My name is Jez Swinscoe and I'm the web developer for Make Hay Ethical E-Media www.makehay.co.uk and would like to say a quick hello.
Amonst other things we run a Green Web Hosting company as well as our web design business.
I would be happy to offer my advice and opinion on platforms and will wade in with ExpressionEngine as a recommended CMS to check out. One key feature of ExpressionEngine (EE) that will be of interest is the Multiple Site Manager - allowing you to deploy and run multiple sites (which can have their own domains) from one central core, with access to update all sites from one control point.
more info here - www.expressionengine.com
Features list here :: www.expressionengine.com/overview/features/
Just an idea as it wasn't a CMS I could see in your consideration list.
On another note, a site launch for September is optimistic, unless you use a ready made social site like Ning or CrowdVine etc
Hi All,
I thought I'd add a few things into the discussion, I'm the tech director over at Ethical Junction.
Some interesting ideas and points being raised. And looking at the approach to the tech platform you've outlined and the ongoing discussions these are my initial reactions / thoughts:
Please let me know if you've already done this, but I think its way too early for you to lock yourself into choosing a platform, be it a Content Managament System or a programming framework.
I think your initial job should be discussing within the transition network what features and tools you are going to need at the core of your daily activities, and essentially draw up a checklist of 'Core Features'.
Its not so much a technical exercise requiring anyone with a specific skillset that's required at this point, although clear direction of options / limitations of various products and tools will help everyone at this stage, instead I see the development of a solid specification of what it is you actually want to do when the platform is running and where you may want it to go / take you in the short-mid-term.
This specification, requires some detail and discussion amongst those who are going to priamrily use it and those who can see the long term development of the movement itself.
This dialog can open up a lot of useuful paramaters that can then be discussed on a more technical level leading to a more practical exercise.
Choosing an off-the-shelf package or building a bespoke solution can only be decided when you're clear on the above.
I would always opt for an Open Source solution. I don't think there is anything you are trying to do that doesn't have an open source tool / application that you could use.
I am great supporter of the Open Source Movement and the ethics and proven track record it represents. It can sometimes be difficult and not always the easiest quickest avenue. But it is most felixible, you can customise, and has a large user base (depending on what you use)
If you develop something on your own, I would suggest you write an open source tool that can be used by the wider community, thus filling a gap.
http://www.opensource.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source
I do think its too early to choose a programming language. Personally I choose php based systems and build php based applications/scripts, because its what I know. but if a developer with other skills knocks on your door and can do what you need, thats all you need.
Your choices should also reflect the ease of maintenance and upgrading.
You don't want to build something in a system by one person and find they were the only person capable of maintaining it.
Here is a lofty idea I had this morning, and it is not about actually choosing a platform.
Maybe each transition town can choose its own style of CMS (one may want to run Plone, one Drupal, one Expression etc)
The scale of what you're doing is really important to be understood before making any comitmments to the technology, that will help you make the right choices, and get a good idea of direction and set realistic timescales.
I'll follow your discussions and offer advice as and when I can.
I'd recommend that everyone who is looking at this thread reads the | linked page | from the first posting before commenting.
Any speculation regarding platform will remain pure speculation until the requirements phase is complete.
And until the requirements team is together, any discussion of the speculations is likely to be a complete waste of time.
This will be a requirements lead initiative, not a technically lead project, and I really really hope that the technodweebs don't start a "my framework is better than yours" discussion right now.
The phasing of this project should make it abundantly clear that techno discussions will need to take place AFTER the requirements team has handed over their document to the evaluation team.
Furthermore, I expect that the teams, once assembled, will probably choose to conduct their work in private, making any speculation here to be even less valuable.
Thanks. Ben.
Re an earlier post suggesting that the launch is in September, please be aware that the 5-Sept date refers to the evaluation team starting their work.
I thought that would be clear on the Platform page, but mebbe I need to check over it. Yep, I've checked it over and it's pretty clear - project aims to kick off in Sept, then 3 months work before implementation phase starts. Depending on solution, initial limited rollout is likely to start early 2009.
Sorry Ben, I did indeed mis-understand that bit!
I don't think anyone here is doing anything other than trying to help with suggestions.
Hi there, I've just joined this forum, as a quick intro we're web application developers that do a lot of work for web 2.0 & mobile using mainly Ruby on Rails for the clever stuff and Drupal CMS for the everyday stuff. I totally agree with the points above that the solution should define the technology and not the other way around.
I'm new to the whole concept so will be spending the next few days absorbing what it's all about. In the mean time have you considered using Basecamp http://www.basecamphq.com for developing the project's features ? If you haven't come across it before, basecamp is an online collaboration tool for managing projects, it's excellent, we use it all the time and our clients really seem to take to it whether they're IT people or not. We have a basecamp install and would be happy to 'donate' a project that we could all use.
Sorry for a longish post...
1. Your project phases 1 - 4 can and should proceed largely in parallel. To establish the functional requirements you want a mixture of ideas from people who have been thinking hard about this for a long time, and who will know about potential solutions, and ideas from the people at the coal face: current members of TT Core Groups, and people like Ben, Rob, Sophie, Naresh all of whom can tell you what their needs and problems are.
So for the functional requirements, I think you want a small team who refine the initial ideas of outline functional areas (more about that below) but very quickly and crudely, informed by a knowledge of what is out there. They would then systematically meet and interview a range of people from Core Groups at different stages and the key players concentrating on the problems they face and their future visions discussing some of the possibilities with them.
This would then be distilled into a set of initial requirements.
2. Implementation strategy - I think it is important to have an ambitious, all singing and dancing vision, but to start by implementing a bare-bones version of it. That should include most or all of the functional areas, in basic form, and should pay huge attention to usability from the start. This should then be offered for use and monitored. The second phase of development will probably consist largely of patching up the weaknesses identified with the first phase, and only then would further features be added.
3. Functionality - I see this platform as a cluster of different systems for different groups, best understood from the perspective of their users.
3a) for the general population in Transition Towns. They need a local portal that becomes so useful and attractive that they look at it regularly, like they check their email. Perhaps it could be seen as the 21st century equivalent of the community newspaper but controlled and with content by its users. Seen as a local portal, managed by the community itself with an individual look and feel (although technically, it may actually be one of very many instances on a common base, or may be completely independent).
Key areas of content:
3b) For the transition movement at a regional or national or transnational level. This is less the day-to-day living stuff and more the ‘keeping the movement functioning as a coherent organism’ stuff. So, includes resources, news about what’s developing, working well, working badly, lessons to learn, etc.
4) General comment on platforms: Yes, much too early for a decision, but I support spiritquest’s comments on open source. Firstly, the development philosophy of open source is consistent with our approach. Secondly, what we do should be available to other projects and movements too. Finally, we will get lots of help from the open source movement.
I would go for an Open Source CMS rather than a platform, because it already includes much infrastructure that will be needed, and because we can quickly build our bare-bones first implementation that way.
5) The teams.
I think there should be a paid person responsible for managing phases 1 - 4, who should have excellent networking skills, a good knowledge of the technology available and of the overall vision, and be a good communicator. This person might do a lot of the interviewing I suggest above. Probably not a developer. (I am not that person, but would like to work closely with them and to be part of the teams in some capacity.)
As for the implementation, you are probably best having one paid person who takes on overall responsibility and management, but supported by a team. The team will include volunteers doing particular tasks, but there should be some funds reserved to pay for specific tasks if appropriate.
Hope this is useful.
Gary
Gary - thanks for input. Very valuable indeed. I've updated the content because I was having the same thoughts as you - we probably need someone to hire someone to coordinate the phases up until the implementation person comes on board.
Great stuff, Gary. I too apologise in advance for a lengthy post...
I am going to sound like my own worst enemy now, but is there a simple answer to why there is a need for this platform? Is it to "lubricate" the transition? I suspect so, just playing the devils advocate. A coherent answer to "why?" will serve as a solid foundation on which to proceed with steps 1-4. That is assuming that the "what?" is a web based software platform for use by LCCN and TT. I'd like to suggest that it should extend to ALL suitable "transmodern" networks from the outset.
About a year ago we held a big openspace/visioning event in Bristol that ended up addressing this. About 30 people from different networks and organisations (all with "sustainable" goals!) came and we talked about what could happen if we all worked together and what we might need to be able to do so. Electricity from algae, reformation of the justice system and building sustainable communities all come up as goals, but the over-riding "need" to achieve these things was a "network of networks" that would act as a catlyst in bringing groups, projects and networks together. The group ended up describing an "network" that could underwrite, support and connect groups/networks - helping to fill any gaps towards any objective, a kind of pooled resource, by connecting skills sets and projects. A crucial part of that network was an online platform.
The visioned "network" itselfs purpose was to connect networks together. An analogy I have found helpful was that it was like a trading floor - the networks were the traders - and the deals made in floor were the connections between networks that improved chances of success in whatever was trying to be achieved.
There are a great number of other partners I might suggest could be brought in to form part of this network - www.gn.apc.org (GreenNet), www.the-hub.net, the Furniture Reuse Network (www.frn.org.uk) to name just three... I know the Social Enterprise Coalition are also very interested in plugging in to and supporting the network too. In fact, through my work with EJ, I have met representatives of so many networks with parrallel objectives - even the regulator of CIC's is interested! There are also many businesses that would like to work with and support this. And, of course, Ethical Junction itself wants to connect to the mainframe too. I have suddenly realised I have been touting this idea of ages!!
In more of a brainstormy style, here are some of the features I think should be thought about when deciding the requirements
- improving communication - email, forums, chat rooms, event listings
- collating ALL email addresses associated with Transition
- production of a daily, weekly, fortnightly, monthly, bi-monthly, quarterly, yearly e-newsletter to disseminate information. I list so many periods so that subscribers can choose the regularity with which the receive it
- collaborative opportunity listings - projects, jobs, funds, grant applications
- market place - clearing house for food, things, services, money, etc
- support
- shared resources - promotional tools, decision/dispute resolution, facilitative advice etc
- peer review and support of products, services, ideas and
Something I absolutely love about the Transition approach is that it comes from the ground up - if this platform is perceived as a "web 2.0" project (facebook is web 2.0 - bascially, it means interactive) the key to its success will be that it is grown in the same way. The existing networks know what they want to engage with so networking with them and asking them, as Gary pointed out, must be done before implementing anything - there HAS to be demand for this project.
Last thought on similar theme is that making good use of what is already out there, as Gary pointed out by using an opensource CMS as opposed to starting from scratch, is paramount to achieving this in a reasonable timeframe. This includes the even less tangible resource of energy within the existing groups striving towards this common goal of transition.
I am well aware that I have gone for the full all singing all dancing bit - but its a nice place to start!
Tom
PS - what does a transition business look like?
This is a pretty interesting link
its about the approach to developing a web2.0 project
I don't see anything about the purpose and set of objectives of the online network. I'm sure you've got this in your minds already, but it would be worth having a (sorry) vision statement - or equivalent for the requirements spec team to communicate to the groups they will be consulting with so everyone's clear about what it's for.
Bovey Climate Action is not part of Transition network, but does belong to the LCCN. I am also involved in supporting the Dartmoor circle of climate groups, which is planning an online networking presence at the moment. It would be great to avoid duplication of effort so please come and talk to us. My guess is that the requirements of these two groups will be different from those of transitioners. I am in favour of the idea which has been put forward of 'clusters' of requirements. And finally, my advice from doing this before is don't start out to solve everything from the word go. Start simple and add functionality organically. Good luck with it!
Cathy - thanks for the comments. You're right about the purpose and objectives - they need a special paragraph and I'll add that to the relevant page.
Regarding collaboration with the LCCN, that's an explicit part of the project as noted in the second paragraph on http://transitiontowns.org/TransitionNetwork/TransitionSoftwarePlatform. Tracey Todhunter is involved and will help coordinate the involvement of LCCN.
Regarding collaboration with Dartmoor circle, there's an open invitation for you to get involved in this project and put forward your views on functionality and scope.
The clusters of requirements that you and Gary mentioned - I'm not sure that has to be explicitly stated as a way of building requirements. I imagine that it'll fall out of the requirements gathering process if it's user-centric.
Great post above, Tom.
"I'd like to suggest that it should extend to ALL suitable "transmodern" networks from the outset." Yes, of course!
And your points about bringing all the groups together too. I see this project as starting to do that from the start, between the various working groups in each Transition Town, and then between Transition Towns. The point being that, for once, we have groups on at least two levels that really do want to co-ordinate and work together. It will enable us to create a platform that others who so choose can join in with. Also, we will learn how to join groups that already have their own platforms.
And Cathy's point "Start simple and add functionality organically." Crucial!
Gary
As there are already many TT web sites (and similar, eg LCCN), aggregation of content from a wide variety of sources will probably need to play a big part in any 'global' TT web site.
Rimu: sadly, many existing TT web sites do not spit out decent (or any!) RSS feeds (see http://uniteddiversity.com/what-is-rss/ ) to allow for the aggregation of their content.
However, LCCN already has a Wordpress MU (multiple user) site up and running and are offering free wordpress blogs (which do spit out decent feeds) and Transtion Town Totnes have already invested in drupal which also does feeds really well (although from what I can tell TTT is not taking advantage of this yet).
Hi All, The original document suggests a "virtual conference for all people involved (using whatever technology you deem to be the most suitable) on 5-Sep-08 at 2pm UK time" which is in a few days.
I've just had a successful Skype conference call with 4 people, talking about this, and we propose that Skype could be the 'suitable technology'. It is a voice conference with an accompanying text chat, useful for passing URLs, etc.
So, how about meeting on Skype on Friday at 2 pm? I'll set up the conference call. Could people please put their Skype addresses (or create one) on a page on the TT Wiki we've set up for the purpose. Using a headphone is a good idea, but not essential.
Gary
Hi Gary,
Yes, the conversation we've just had was interesting and it would be good to see how some of the ideas (or perhaps more accurately the beginnings of a consensus that reflect and draw on many of the comments above) could be developed by a larger / wider group.
I'd like to be involved in whatever conversation emerges. As you well know I'm not expert when it comes to software or software development and can't make much of a contribution on those topics, but I think the current discussion is as much conceptual as practical and, as such, non-techies have an important role to play.
Personally I think there is a lack of clarity about the 'layers' or 'hierarchy' that the chosen platform should have and how these might be specified, managed and linked / aggregated (but I'll say no more as I don't know all the right words!!! - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Bourdieu#Language)
I think it's also important to remain focused on the potential users of any software platform too. As someone involved in a Transition core group I'm aware that many of our group and mailing list do not make use of the current wiki, often don't even check their emails very frequently and are not all that confident with many of the everyday tools found on the web.
For that reason any talk of knowledge management (I'm not really all that sure what knowledge management is, but I'm guessing a library of some sort; an indexed searchable repository?) must not lose touch with the fact that software is only a tool. For that reason there has to be a broad consultation with all Transition groups; what do they want? how do they want to access it? Without this large sections of the grassroots will be marginalised.
So yes, I have signed-up here too:
http://transitiontowns.org/Bungay/DevelopmentConf
It should be a really stimulating discussion - I'm looking forward to it!
Josiah
Sorry, I won't be able to take part in the Skype conversation as I'll be on a train with variable mobile reception and no internet on Friday.
Hi all,
Would love to make it on Friday but I'll be right in the middle of a workshop in Leeds.
Next time :)
Our online Skype conference is tomorrow, and so far we are expecting 7 people to be present. More are still welcome.
You must log in to post.