Easy to grasp central list of addon's anywhere?

[MattyUSA]

Hi Merlinpa1969

Thanks for the 'heads up' there.

I haven't the energy nor inclination for a drop down fight to convince people there is a need (perceived or real for this), it shouldn't be that hard. I guess I'll move on.

I'll see if I can add it easily in a contribution maybe ask Tim if I can start with his source. If not then I'll move onto another cart that can handle it.

I guess I have a lot to left to understand about how things work with these projects. It seems like a no brainer to me:
More users improve Zen. Users need this (for real reasons or perceived reasons, it is not relevant). There are add ons the authors and leaving alone, surely it is not a big deal to evaluate their code and add the feature (switchable from admin so it is not a forced feature) to Zen Cart. If their code measures up or can be adjusted to then make it a supported feature. Now Zen cart has leaped ahead, the users that needed it didn't need to go elsewhere and Zen Cart user base grows...

Repeat for next desired bit of functionality, like location zones and so on.

Surely the addons represent missing desired functionality from Zen Cart. If the ability was there in Zen no addon would have been created. We don't want to go adding every users "one off" addon, I understand. But the popular addons used by many are the ones that represent a real desire/drive/need that is unfulfilled. Surely they should, could get some integration evaluation and possibly action.


Relying on an addon that becomes unsupported leaves the users in a sticky spot. How many users does Zen-Cart lose because of this or because they spot this and don't want to get caught in that position.

Forgive me for saying so, I am new here, I may not grasp many concepts about how the project development occurs and could be just plain wrong, but does anyone else think this project at the moment is inflexible? Perhaps I perceive this only because there seems a high level of difficulty and effort in order to get new features debated/proposed. I'm also aware I could be simply in the wrong room so to speak. Or ignorant of how to properly proceed. Feel free to correct me. Education is better than criticism.

So how are the users heard? Their needs evaluated? New features suggested or voted upon? How do the users steer the project?

Color me interested.

Matt

[Kim]

Matt -

You are experiencing Open Source. It is a strange beast since in the end the User determines the path of the project, though it is not always immediately apparent. Each Open Source project has different ways of doing things. The Zen Cart way is to stick to our internal road map and add significant popular functionality when it fits within the roadmap or the needed infrastructure has been brought up to the level really needed to support it. It does not happen overnight.

Zen Cart is a highly complex piece of machinery, every action effects other parts and so you don't just drop things in willy nilly and expect it to work.

If you were to compare the functionality of Zen Cart with its parent osCommerce, (stock install for both, no mods added) you would find there have been 100's of features already added to make Zen Cart easy to shop with, easier to use, bigger, better, stronger ... Look at our track record so far.:

3 major releases, dozens of "bug fix"/security patch/enhanced minor releases. More than 500,000 downloads, 1000's of live shops, an active growing support community. All in less time than it has taken osC to release 2 bug fixes. Perhaps we aren't moving at the speed of light, but we certainly aren't stale or inflexible.

We get criticized for not having 1000's of mods available in the Download section. We don't need that many. When there is a need usually someone fills it. That is the nature of Open Source. You don't have to wait on the developers to add a feature that you need. You can build (or have built) the code to add to or modify the base. You can release the code to the community and another can pick that code up and change it again to suit his particular needs. The original author is not obligated to support his work either, but if he chooses to it is all volunteer.

Because we (the dev team) are active on the forums, we watch what is going on and evaluate the popularity, the need, and other factors of various mods and requests. We know exactly what needs to be done to make Zen Cart reach Nirvana. You don't do it in an hour or a day or maybe even a year, but rather one small step at a time so that everyone can keep up if they choose.

Zen Cart can be almost anything you want it to be. It is like bamboo, it can be bent into many shapes if you take the time to learn its secrets.

[MattyUSA]

Hi Kim

Thanks for the explanation.

Zen Cart is a highly complex piece of machinery, every action effects other parts and so you don't just drop things in willy nilly and expect it to work.

No you'd have to evaluate the coding and decide if things are done to a good enough standard or could be adapted in a suitable enough way. In the same way other features were added I guess.

So just to be sure I understand this correctly.

Zen Cart features are steered by its users/community.
It's new features are decided by the roadmap.
The Roadmap is created by Dev team.
The Dev team read the forums to figure out what features to include in roadmap.
Users/community influence Dev team by forum postings and popularity of mods used.


Ok so the way to find out if the Search Engine Friendly URL's is a feature that might be popular enough to be included in the roadmap is via the forums.

Where would I be best posting a poll for the Dev Teams attention so they can gauge if it is worth putting on the roadmap.

The wish list/feature suggestion forum perhaps?

In short: I would definitely find Zen Cart more suitable for me and my customers if Search Engine Friendly URL's were a feature. since they are not, I might be prepared to stick with Zen Cart if one of the addons for them were author supported/being developed. But they both seem significantly behind the zen cart versions. At his point I'm thinking I don't like to re-invent the wheel but perhaps I can do it myself.

I wouldn't mind developing this code and giving it to Zen Cart for inclusion for fee but I wouldn't want to have to redo it every time a Zen Cart release came out. Besides it has already been done by Tim and Dream-Scape.

but we certainly aren't stale or inflexible.

Fair enough, my ignorance on the way things are done to blame there. Sorry.

I still don't quite grasp the best way for users to vote/influence the dev team to give Zen Cart the features that have popular demand. But I understand that may be my ignorance about where to post a poll, rally votes, whatever.

I'd be happier if I felt that the user support (or not) for this particular feature was conclusively evaluated but perhaps I can set this off myself.

I will continue to suggest Zen cart to potential store owners I speak too. I'll also point out the no Search Engine URL's feature (or active addon) and that it is a debated issue and if they ask which side of the fence I sit on. So far 4 out of 4 have moved on for lack of this feature.

Thanks again Kim for your response it does put things into perspective and teach me a little about the "Zen Cart way".

Matt

[DrByte]

Matt,

Just my 2 cents for the moment ...

There is no need for polls in order to have certain topics get the attention of the dev team. Polls have their place, but seldom have direct influence on decision-making. As Kim said, we read the forums; we post; we try things out; we research; we code; we watch, sometimes silently. If an issue is popular and beneficial enough to the masses vs one or two folks, things get considered for inclusion.

One thing that quickly rules something OUT from inclusion is lack of cross-platform compability/usability. SEFU is a prime example. It doesn't work on all servers due to technical requirements. In those cases, they are typically left as contributions which can be added as desired/needed.

On the issue of SEFU and the requirement for mod_rewrite to make any of the current contributions work ... how would *you* recommend addressing the problem that there are MANY hosts who do not support mod_rewrite, and thus SEFU cannot be used on their servers. Most notably IIS servers...

(I could interject that my own opinion is that IIS shouldn't be used as a webserver, but that gets into other wars which I don't wish to open here for discussion ... in a perfect world we wouldn't have such limitations.)

[MattyUSA]

Thanks DrByte

That makes a lot of sense.

It raise a question or two.

1> Are there any other features of Zen Cart that are not dual platform?
I have to admit I don't know the project well enough to answer this one honestly.

2> Perhaps a guide/introduction to the criteria that the Dev team use select reject features for the roadmap would be a good thing to show (maybe I just haven't found it). Hazarding a guess from the forum responses so far:

a) A prospective feature must exhibit popular support in the forums.
b) It must be supportable cross platforms.
c) No need to change file permissions is a plus.

Any others to add?

That really is a good reason for leaving it as a mod, the best proposed yet. I would argue it is easy enough to test for platform support and enable or disable it from admin, but regardless that is more complexity than originally scoped so I can understand the stance.


I guess I am trying to decide if I want to develop a mod to do this. I'm happy with the technical challenge but not with the risk of needing to redevelop with every new release of Zen Cart. If I had to do that I'd be tempted to go commercial (say $15 each) or ask for donations.

Whilst accepting that Search Engine Friendly URL's might have to remain as a mod instead of a feature due to single platform support I would argue/suggest that Zen Cart would benefit from re-examining the popular mods to see if there exhibit inclusion chances. Localization changes zones could quickly be expanded for example I guess.

Ahh well, thanks for every bodies responses, I'm learning as I go here.

Matt