Products

Solutions

Resources

Partners

Community

Blog

About

QA

Ideas Test

New Community Website

Ordinarily, you'd be at the right spot, but we've recently launched a brand new community website... For the community, by the community.

Yay... Take Me to the Community!

Welcome to the DNN Community Forums, your preferred source of online community support for all things related to DNN.
In order to participate you must be a registered DNNizen

HomeHomeOur CommunityOur CommunityGeneral Discuss...General Discuss...Capacity and Scalability of DNNCapacity and Scalability of DNN
Previous
 
Next
New Post
8/23/2006 6:07 PM
 

acomes,

we don't have a single particular target customer, instead DotNetNuke is positioned as a web application framework. We do however plan changes with a number of stakeholders in mind, and these include hosters, intranet, extranet and internet portals, as well as non-portal web applications. At the minute we're in an extended period of stabilisation, with at least 1 more release that addresses bug fixes/performance issues. After that expect us to communicate more about the future plans, and expect various items on the roadmap (http://dotnetnuke.com/Development/Roadmap/tabid/616/Default.aspx) to get better defined, as well as marked for particular versions.

As for AD, it was a popular 3rd party add-on created and maintained by a coreteam member, so it made sense to build it into DNN. We are aware of the support issues which are primarily caused by lack of access to AD setups/relevant experience, I'm sure the AD team will reach out to the wider community for volunteers to address this.

Cathal


Buy the new Professional DNN7: Open Source .NET CMS Platform book Amazon US
 
New Post
8/23/2006 7:54 PM
 

As the initiator of this thread, I'd like to thank those who have contributed.  This is the fantastic thing about DNN; the fact that people from the community are prepared to dedicate their time to answering these requests.

Steve T

 
New Post
8/23/2006 11:08 PM
 
cathal wrote

egyptegypt, I'm don't wish to appear as if I'm picking on you (I only wish to use your comments to illustrate a point), but your comments are typical of ones I've heard many times ("It required extensive customization to get it to a useable state and it's still a work in progress. "), but we get surprisingly little of this feedback/customisation code from the community. Have you any information/code you wish to share, I'm sure we'de be interested in listening (I appreciate that some people make changes that they regard as their intellectual property/unique selling point, and the BSD licence makes this completely fine). In many cases unless people step forward and make their concerns apparent, they won't be addressed - simply put, if we don't know of them, theres little we can do to fix them. Communication is something an open source community is supposed to be better at than closed source , I encourage everyone to try to make it so.

I wish I could contribute some of the changes but 1. the code belongs to my client, not me and 2. there were other fundamental changes made to the core that likely would not be adopted and some of the improvements incorporated these core changes.

As for not bringing problems to anyone's attention, that's just not true.  In just about every case where I discovered a bug or limitation, I either posted it to the ASP.Net forums or saw that someone else had beaten me to the punch.  Generally speaking, nothing came of these posts so I eventually stopped bothering.  I realize folks are contributing their time so I'm not passing judgment.  But I have to prioritize my time as well.

 
New Post
8/23/2006 11:39 PM
 
cathal wrote

(I only wish to use your comments to illustrate a point), but your comments are typical of ones I've heard many times ("It required extensive customization to get it to a useable state and it's still a work in progress. "), but we get surprisingly little of this feedback/customisation code from the community. Have you any information/code you wish to share, I'm sure we'de be interested in listening

Cathal,

I recently abstracted DotNetNuke.Services.Mail.SendMail into a provider based object. I would be happy to see this make it's way into the core. From my testing all my core and 3rd party modules are working untouched with the default provider I created.

I have been missing emails due to a issue with my host's mail server being down, so I created a second provider as well to handle queueing of mail. I am willing to give up the default CDO provider.

Question is, how can I contribute this back into the core?

Thanks,

Dave

 
New Post
8/24/2006 8:26 AM
 
  1. Add it as an item on support.dotnetnuke.com
  2. flag it as a high priority feature request, describe in the comments what you did and why. and link to a zipfile containing source so people can experiment with it.
  3. Every time someone mentions a mail related item on the forums, spread the word about the enhancements you would like to see and link to your item on support.dotnetnuke.com

That would makeshure to get it included in somewhere in the near future  It all depends on your coding style and your ability to document why they really need to include your enhancement


Edit your Skin.xml and Container.xml files with:
Yannick's SXE
 
Previous
 
Next
HomeHomeOur CommunityOur CommunityGeneral Discuss...General Discuss...Capacity and Scalability of DNNCapacity and Scalability of DNN


These Forums are dedicated to discussion of DNN Platform and Evoq Solutions.

For the benefit of the community and to protect the integrity of the ecosystem, please observe the following posting guidelines:

  1. No Advertising. This includes promotion of commercial and non-commercial products or services which are not directly related to DNN.
  2. No vendor trolling / poaching. If someone posts about a vendor issue, allow the vendor or other customers to respond. Any post that looks like trolling / poaching will be removed.
  3. Discussion or promotion of DNN Platform product releases under a different brand name are strictly prohibited.
  4. No Flaming or Trolling.
  5. No Profanity, Racism, or Prejudice.
  6. Site Moderators have the final word on approving / removing a thread or post or comment.
  7. English language posting only, please.
What is Liquid Content?
Find Out
What is Liquid Content?
Find Out
What is Liquid Content?
Find Out