Bert brings up an interesting issue in this post: http://willy.boerland.com/myblog/googles_birthday_and_drupal.
This is the 2001 mission statement:
To develop a leading edge open-source content management system that implements the latest thinking in community publishing, knowledge management, and software design. We value flexibility, simplicity, and utility in our product; teamwork, innovation, and openness in our community; and modularity, extensibility and maintainability in our code.
This is the current mission statement:
By building on relevant standards and open source technologies, Drupal supports and enhances the potential of the Internet as a medium where diverse and geographically-separated individuals and groups can collectively produce, discuss, and share information and ideas. With a central interest in and focus on communities and collaboration, Drupal's flexibility allows the collaborative production of online information systems and communities.
I agree that the 2001 mission statement is much more clear and honest than the current commercialified mission. The last sentence makes absolutely no sense:
With a central interest in and focus on communities and collaboration, Drupal's flexibility allows the collaborative production of online information systems and communities.
So, with a focus on communities and collaboration, Drupal allows the collaborative production of communities?
Also, we stopped writing "Internet" with a capital "I" in 1999.
Comments
oldie but goodie
The 2001 statement is still very good. If we can nix 'content management system' without a 300 post bikeshed discussion about it, let's change it back quick!
How this?
Sexy!
OK that's just perfect. And I know a couple of people who will love the social publishing reference (you know who you are).
heh
I think I know one of those people too, in fact that's why I put it in ;)
That's a mission statement followed by a value statement
That's a mission statement followed by a value statement and it lessens the impact. How about rolling them together, like so:
I post this at the risk of bikeshedding things, but think it's important to get the standard we all rally under as succintly defined as possible.
mlsamuelson
Sounds good except instead
Sounds good except instead of "content management platform" how about "content presentation platform". Drupal is a bit more than management of content.
Content management implies
Content management implies creating, editing, deleting and displaying content, whereas presentation would merely imply display.
--
My Drupal Articles
OK, Bikeshedding (sorry)
"content management framework"... I think framework really is important considering we ARE a framework... less a "system" or "platform". We're also MUCH more than a "presentation platform" as we do MUCH more than just PRESENT content as well. In fact, I would argue (vehemently) that managing content is much more descriptive than presenting it...
So with that, I do too love the older version (w/ revisions) I would just say let's define ourselves as what we are, and Drupal IS a framework. That's the best word for it, and we redefine ourselves as that all the time when speaking about the product, so let's do it in text too. :-)
Eclipse
that's the one
This one integrates the changes from both EclipseGc and mlsamuelson, I meant framework when I typed platform, honest!
catch's version is very
catch's version is very good. IMO, it needs a few extra verbs in there though, to make the clauses work.
To develop a leading edge open-source content management framework implementing the latest thinking in social publishing, knowledge management, and software design; valuing flexibility, simplicity, and utility in product; supporting teamwork, innovation, and openness in community; and expressing modularity, extensibility and maintainability in code.
I like it
Implementing, valuing, supporting and expressing. Sounds perfect to me. Nice!
uhhh
++ from me on this one.
webmasters
I have enough d.o access to change this directly, but rather than do that I've linked to here from the webmasters issue queue: http://drupal.org/node/316250 - if no objections, I'm going to change it to the version suggested by Keith - since we have pretty much universal agreement (at least between the handful of people who posted here).
I agree with this, but...
The wording of the proposed statement is excellent. All except for one thing, however. It kinda needs a reference to 'blue smurf' right at the end there, or people won't know we're talking about Drupal. ;-)
+1 Catch. Post it.
______________________________
Senpai (my d.o account)
~ Build a better WorkHabit ~
Joel Farris | my 'certified to rock' score
Transparatech
http://transparatech.com
619.717.2805
Me too - nice.
Me too - nice.
Mission statements are for
Mission statements are for suckers, no one cares about your mission, they care about what you actually produce and pull off.
Tj Holowaychuk
Vision Media - Victoria BC Web Design
Victoria British Columbia Web Design School
Tj Holowaychuk
Vision Media - Victoria BC Web Design
Victoria British Columbia Web Design School
we have one anyway though
If this thread was about 'writing a new mission statement for Drupal' then I'd have ignored it and largely agreed with you. But as it is, we have a quite confusingly worded mission statement now, and the opportunity to improve on it by using something that already exists and has a nice providence.
Also, posting on threads about missions statements is for suckers, or didn't you know?
:D Tj Holowaychuk Vision
:D
Tj Holowaychuk
Vision Media - Victoria BC Web Design
Victoria British Columbia Web Design School
Tj Holowaychuk
Vision Media - Victoria BC Web Design
Victoria British Columbia Web Design School
Waiting for input from Dries
Issue http://drupal.org/node/316250 seems to be agreed upon but we need someone to push it live.