Learn More





DNN Community Blog

The Community Blog is a personal opinion of community members and by no means the official standpoint of DNN Corp or DNN Platform. This is a place to express personal thoughts about DNNPlatform, the community and its ecosystem. Do you have useful information that you would like to share with the DNN Community in a featured article or blog? If so, please contact .

The use of the Community Blog is covered by our Community Blog Guidelines - please read before commenting or posting.

Architecture Working Group Kickoff

In an earlier blog Joe described his vision of  "What Does It Mean To Be Open Source?".  One of the key pieces in that vision is Community Participation.  We have already given committer permissions to our Github repository to three of our MVPs, Peter Donker, Vicenc Masanas and Brian Dukes, and yesterday we held the "kickoff" meeting for a new Working Group, the Architecture Working Group.

I am not yet 100% convinced that we have the right name for this group, as it will probably cover more than just "Architecture", but until we come up with a different/better name we will go with "Architecture Working Group".

As Chief Architect for DNN Corp I lead/chair this group, and the initial members of the group are a balance of DNN Corp Engineering members and Community members.  Attending yesterday's meeting were Bob Kruger, Joe Brinkman, Cathal Connolly and myself from DNN Corp, the aforementioned committers Peter Donker, Vicenc Masanas and Brian Dukes from the community as well as Erik van Ballegoij.  MVP Oliver Hine is also a member of the group, but was unable to attend yesterday's initial meeting.

We spent some time discussing our mandate, which broadly breaks down into two areas:

  • Managing Pull Requests
  • Guiding the direction of future versions of the Platform (the roadmap)

In particular we focused our attention on the first broad area - Managing Pull Requests - as the new committers were looking for some guidance on how to proceed.  Whereas, Pull Requests used to be reviewed by Shaun, Cathal and myself - all DNN Corp employees, this would now be extended to include the committers.  We discussed how formal the process should be - what would be the minimum requirements for a Pull Request to be included, how flexible we should be in handling Pull Requests that don't meet the minimum requirements, and how we should handle Pull Requests that needed to be rejected.

We also discussed the topic of "Code Reviews".  Obviously a Pull Request will be "reviewed" by at least one committer before being committed to the repository, but we also discussed committers reviewing other committers changes.  A second pair of eyes can often catch something that the original creator of the code overlooked.

We decided that given the amount of work we should meet biweekly.  In terms of action items the only decisions that were made were to investigate a smoother process for new contributors to "sign" a "Contributor License Agreement", and to be open in our deliberations - hence this blog.



2sic Daniel Mettler
Hi Charles
I have a few concerns about this. Specifically, community contribution for most bug fixes are pretty straight forward and it's easy to judge if such a feature should be added. But when people start "enhancing" the platform with features they think are great - then this can also cause a lot of trouble down the road when these features are barely used and/or the setup is different then a similar feature in another part of the system. Widgets comes to mind as well as many inconsistencies that grew with the platform.

Please provide us with some clear guides so that both the contributors as well as the "releasers" will be able to encourage contributions and still block some of them without hurting anybody's feelings.

2sic Daniel Mettler Monday, August 25, 2014 2:59 AM (link)
Charles Nurse
@Daniel - you raise a valid point and this group will have a lot of input into the Roadmap. For me personally I will be applying the test- should Feature X be in the Platform (for everybody to use) or should it be an extension in the Forge?
Charles Nurse Monday, August 25, 2014 11:57 AM (link)

Comment Form

Only registered users may post comments.


2sic Daniel Mettler (124)
Aderson Oliveira (15)
Alec Whittington (11)
Alex Shirley (10)
Andrew Nurse (30)
Anthony Glenwright (5)
Antonio Chagoury (28)
Ash Prasad (22)
Ben Schmidt (1)
Benjamin Hermann (25)
Benoit Sarton (9)
Beth Firebaugh (12)
Bill Walker (36)
Bob Kruger (5)
Brian Dukes (2)
Brice Snow (1)
Bruce Chapman (20)
Bryan Andrews (1)
cathal connolly (55)
Charles Nurse (163)
Chris Hammond (203)
Chris Paterra (55)
Clinton Patterson (28)
Cuong Dang (21)
Daniel Bartholomew (2)
Dave Buckner (2)
David Poindexter (3)
David Rodriguez (2)
Doug Howell (11)
Erik van Ballegoij (30)
Ernst Peter Tamminga (74)
Geoff Barlow (6)
Gifford Watkins (3)
Gilles Le Pigocher (3)
Ian Robinson (7)
Israel Martinez (17)
Jan Blomquist (2)
Jan Jonas (3)
Jaspreet Bhatia (1)
Jenni Merrifield (6)
Joe Brinkman (270)
John Mitchell (1)
Jon Henning (14)
Jonathan Sheely (4)
Jordan Coopersmith (1)
Joseph Craig (2)
Kan Ma (1)
Keivan Beigi (3)
Ken Grierson (10)
Kevin Schreiner (6)
Leigh Pointer (31)
Lorraine Young (60)
Malik Khan (1)
Matthias Schlomann (15)
Mauricio Márquez (5)
Michael Doxsey (7)
Michael Tobisch (3)
Michael Washington (202)
Mike Horton (19)
Mitchel Sellers (28)
Nathan Rover (3)
Navin V Nagiah (14)
Néstor Sánchez (31)
Nik Kalyani (14)
Peter Donker (52)
Philip Beadle (135)
Philipp Becker (4)
Richard Dumas (22)
Robert J Collins (5)
Roger Selwyn (8)
Ruben Lopez (1)
Ryan Martinez (1)
Salar Golestanian (4)
Sanjay Mehrotra (9)
Scott McCulloch (1)
Scott S (11)
Scott Wilkinson (3)
Scott Willhite (97)
Sebastian Leupold (80)
Shaun Walker (237)
Shawn Mehaffie (17)
Stefan Cullmann (12)
Stefan Kamphuis (12)
Steve Fabian (31)
Timo Breumelhof (24)
Tony Henrich (3)
Torsten Weggen (2)
Vicenç Masanas (27)
Vincent Nguyen (3)
Vitaly Kozadayev (6)
Will Morgenweck (37)
Will Strohl (163)
William Severance (5)
Try Evoq
For Free
Start Free Trial
a Demo
See Evoq Live
Need More Information?