CiviCRM Community Forums (archive)

CiviCRM 5.0 aims to provide significant architectural improvements (without changing major features). But which architectural improvements? What's the value, and how should they work? What experiments lead us to believe that they will work well for CiviCRM? The purpose of the saloon is to have an open, on-going discussion about issues, ideas, and code that can go into 5.0. If you've found a pattern, library, trick, or commit that you want to share -- great!

However, these are very early stages in 5.0, so the discussion should be focused more on research, communication, and exploration and less on decision-making and commitments. Thus, the "5.0 saloon" -- for informal discussion. Suggested guidelines:

• Everything said in the saloon may become wrong. Tim may report to the forum on a failed experiment by posting a comment of woe and anguish; three months, Kurund may quietly revive the experiment, have a flash of revelation, commit some magic code, and send a PR -- without ever posting about it here. That's OK. His magic code would show up in github notifications. And my tale of woe and anguish may give someone a deeper understanding about the issues.
• Silence is OK. If Tim makes a post and no one responds, that just means no one has anything useful to say right now. (I fully expect to make posts on esoteric topics to which no one responds -- until 2 months later at a conference.) Even if a post or comment gets no reply, it can still make us (as readers, as a community) smarter and better informed.
• Some things will be built to be thrown away. That's OK.
• The saloon is not a committee making a decision. It wasn't elected and doesn't have bylaws or voting procedures. It's a disparate group people who trying to learn about and work on a shared problem.

Google.com likes my spelling. Google.co.nz and google.co.uk might not... but then again, they seem to have a lot of spelling mistakes...

UPDATE: Of course, my message had other typos... and a few dropped words... but nothing we can't fix with a little revisionism.