In
this thread, Peter Markland argued, "If we can't support a site like OpenACS.org out of the box with OpenACS then [something is wrong]," and I very much agree with this. The difference between a great toolkit and a good toolkit is in how it's maintained. If you need a new feature and you find something close in the toolkit and you modify it, the toolkit is static. If you can add your feature in an optional, backwards-compatible way and put it back in the toolkit, the toolkit grows. We need to keep lowering the bar for newcomers to work in that second way - in part by setting an example. I think we should try to run OpenACS.org off of stock, keep it at the current version, and make upgrading it successfully and without errors a gate condition for beta and rc releases.
