Re: Re-igniting the Membership Committee

To be honest, I chose flask because I wanted to learn about it. memberdb
seemed like something that might be useful to LA. I was aware of the
problems with the current implementation and thought a rewrite might be
helpful.

I've had some fun and learned quite a bit, it may yet prove to be useful,
but if it isn't it's still been a worthwhile exercise for me.

I encourage any LA members with knowledge of CiviCRM to step forward and
help implement a replacement for memberdb.

In the meantime I'll keep working on the flask version - gratefully
accepting any help, and without expecting LA to feel any obligation to use
the final product.

This is one of the strengths of free software - we're all free to
contribute and LA as an organization is free to choose the platform that
best meets their need.

I personally have a preference for python over php, but it's just that - a
preference. I don't have hard data to back it up, just feelings :-)

Reinventing the wheel can be fun, but feel free to stick with Wheel 1.0 if
you prefer.

Cheers,
Neill
On 11 Feb 2016 10:25 PM, "David Lloyd" <lloy0076-t0RjpzUORie6c6uEtOJ/[email protected]> wrote:

>
> CiviCRM is already a stable product, based on Drupal and no doubt could
> leverage the various Drupal modules already developed with sufficient
> technical knowledge. I doubt there's insufficient technical knowledge in
> Linux Australia to do so...
>
> ...why would we reinvent the wheel? Sure choosing a PHP based solution
> might hinder those who don't know PHP but choosing a Python based one
> hinders those who don't know Python. In fact, choosing a solution based
> on X will hinder those who don't like X and let's face it, we can't even
> sort out a name for the organisation - we're not going to settle on the
> best technical solution.
>
> This last point is probably a good thing BUT I would argue that Linux
> Australia doesn't exist to create a confounded CRM system. Or reinvent
> electoral systems. Or even create open source software itself.
>
> The tools we use for membership management are important but they're not
> our goal in life unless I've seriously misread Linux Australia's
> constitution and policies.
>
> The question I would actually put to the membership committee, would be:
>
> "Can you find ways that would cause the membership of Linux Australia to
> increase such that we needed a technical replacement urgently?".
>
> TL;DR - I think we're concentrating on the technical side and missing
> the actual issue...
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: linux-aus [mailto:linux-aus-bounces-cunTk1MwBs8iFSDQTTA3OBCuuivNXqWP@public.gmane.org] On
> Behalf
> > Of Kathy Reid
> > Sent: Thursday, 11 February 2016 8:25 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [Linux-aus] Re-igniting the Membership Committee
> >
> > Thanks AJ for the thought you've put into this, and to Neill for the
> work
> > that you've done around this as well.
> >
> > I'd be very comfortable with this approach - ie pitching for your idea
> to
> > be developed further, with iterative proof points before an
> > implementation.
> >
> > Are there any other people who'd be keen on being on "Team CiviCRM"?
> >
> > Kind regards,
> > Kathy
> >
> > On 11/02/16 16:32, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 10:00:43AM +1100, Kathy Reid wrote:
> > >> I'd like to
> > >> reinvigorate the debate over our Membership Committee[0],
> > Membership
> > >> platform[1] and related pieces[2].
> > > I wonder if it would work to structure this more along the lines of
> > > linux.conf.au bid teams, rather than as a sub-committee. ie, the
> > > council posts a date for bids to be in; Kathy does as civicrm
> demo/bid
> > > showing how cool it could be, maybe someone does a drupal
> > bid/demo,
> > > and maybe Neill does flask/memberdb-ng bid. The council gives a few
> > > rounds of feedback to see how if the bids can be further improved,
> > and
> > > then chooses the most promising bid (and a committee is formed at
> > that point if needed).
> > >
> > > (Personally, I'm more philosophically inclined towards Neill's
> > > approach; but Donna pointed me at some drupal election modules
> > which
> > > seemed pretty impressive, and while looking for survey software, I
> > > noticed civicrm actually has some and is already packaged for
> Debian,
> > > both of which seem like plusses to me)
> > >
> > > If people like this idea it could be implemented by the council
> doing
> > > a call for bids asking for:
> > >
> > >    - a bid document describing what's great about the proposed
> solution
> > >    - a public demo site where people can try things out
> > >    - access to the demo site's management side, so the secretary at
> least
> > >      can review that as well
> > >    - instructions/packages/config items/etc for how to deploy the
> > system
> > >      (for public review, but more importantly for the admin team to
> > review)
> > >    - and anything else that seems helpful and enlightening
> > >
> > > and setting deadlines of maybe "now" for interested people to get
> > > together and start doing things, April 4th for sending expressions
> of
> > > interest to the list/council, June 1st for initial submissions and
> > > feedback, and August 1st for final submissions, so a decision could
> be
> > > made and rollout begin in September or October?
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > aj
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > linux-aus mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > linux-aus mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-aus mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus
>

_______________________________________________
linux-aus mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus