[Vtigercrm-developers] 6.5.0 Release Update

[Garry Brighton]

Clear enough... disgusting approach of vtiger uncovered...
Obviously vtiger ondemand generating enough to handle excellent development
of both their versions, but that's not a plan....
Vtiger internal development resources (OS) is a set to NOT create progress
as this will feed competitors who is every single developer here.
They go money from onDemand, and they don't wanna lose it. This is the only
direction they wanna grow.
The only exception is fast development of poor extension store from where
Vtiger dream to get additional coins and code of modules what they use for
own internal stuff. So, it kinda rapping... isn't it? How you feel? How
long you will be dreaming about improvement here? How long the same subject
is discussed here?


On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 10:54 PM, Błażej Pabiszczak <
b.pabiszczak at yetiforce.com> wrote:

> It's amazing how much you can discuss, how many people participate in
> that, and how huge the leader of the project is, and despite all that, for
> the past 2 years barely anything has been done. The majority of the people
> who are still on the list are companies that create commercial modules, for
> whom changes [especially the significant ones] are inconvenient, because
> they will require module fixes. For those who gain profit from the lack of
> features no changes is great news, for Vtiger users - not so much.
>
> The vision of Vtiger 7 appearing in Q2/2017 will be postponed a few times,
> and to make it even worse, nobody knows what it will include, whether or
> not the final effect is worth the wait [time will tell]. At the moment,
> Vtiger as the project's leader isn't really involved, and this can't work
> in the long run, especially if people want to treat Vtiger's development as
> part of their business, and not just a toy.
>
> On one hand I'm happy with what's happening [no core development, hundreds
> of missing functionalities substituted by ill-considered expensive
> modules]; on the other hand I know that it will also negatively impact
> everyone, because Vtiger and SugarCRM influence the way the entire open
> source CRM community is perceived. Compare the development of these systems
> within the last 4 weeks:
>
>    1.
>
>    Vtiger: https://github.com/YetiForceCompany/vtiger/pulse/monthly
>    2.
>
>    YetiForce:
>    https://github.com/YetiForceCompany/YetiForceCRM/pulse/monthly
>    3.
>
>    coreBOS: https://github.com/tsolucio/corebos/pulse/monthly
>    4.
>
>    EPESI: https://github.com/Telaxus/EPESI/pulse/monthly
>    5.
>
>    SuiteCRM: https://github.com/salesagility/SuiteCRM/pulse/monthly
>    6.
>
>    SugarCRML https://github.com/sugarcrm/sugarcrm_dev/pulse/monthly
>
> Looking at this only you can figure out how many people are involved in
> these systems, how huge the communities are...you can only see the last
> month's work, but the situation has been similar for all these systems for
> the past year. I watch these [and many more] projects all the time to learn
> from them as much as I can. What I can see is the fact that open source is
> not doing well, there are many small projects, and each of them takes away
> valuable part of the community. Additionally, there's a bunch of people and
> companies who just want to take, and give nothing in return.
>
> If projects like coreBOS, EPESI, YetiForce, and Vtiger were merged, we
> would be in a completely different place now, and what we could achieve
> would be bigger and better than any given project.
>
> PS. Congrats on the upcoming version 6.5 that doesn't patch any critical
> security errors in Vtiger and client portal :D Each new release keeps
> surprising me more and more, great job ;).
> ---
> Z poważaniem / Regards
>
> *Błażej Pabiszczak*
> *Chief Executive Officer*
> M: +48.884999123
> E: b.pabiszczak at yetiforce.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.vtiger.com/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.vtigercrm.com/pipermail/vtigercrm-developers/attachments/20160629/ca4cf1a4/attachment-0001.html>