Structuration of the EA forum

[Kamal Hammoutene]

I find that the current EA forum contains a massive number of good information about the uses and misuses of the tool.

The current forum structure is not optimised as interesting threads are too quickly replaced by new topics.

Would it be possible to use a structure such as the one that phpbb is using:
hthttps://www.phpbb.com/showcase/  ?

[qwerty]

I can tell you the answer: No. We once had this discussion ages ago. There was one change which resulted in this structure. We have to live with it, I guess.

q.

[skiwi]

We seem to be stuck with the current forum.
IMHO most newbies struggle with searching, attaching images, lack of tags.
The forum does not seem to have a business owner interested in improving the customer experience and service.
Although full credit to the Sparxians who hang out here and provide great advice.

[g.makulik]

At least you can enhance your search capabilities, see Wyatt's links in this thread: http://www.sparxsystems.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1352217021.

HTH
Günther

P.S.: There's also a tag for EA at the StackOverflow site: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/enterprise-architect, SO is more restrictive to have a more FAQ suitable format of questions and answers. But if it's really useful depends on the topic's popularity though   ...

[qwerty]

The forum does not seem to have a business owner interested in improving the customer experience and service.

Very obvious, unfortunately. In my opinion EA's popularity is in great part based on it's lively forum. So improving that should also help acquire new customers. So it's a mystery that this forum is treated as a stepchild.

q.

[g.makulik]

So it's a mystery that this forum is treated as a stepchild.

[business view]
As long it "somehow" works, efforts might be better put on feature enhancements and bug eliminations (keeping exactly this order).
[\business view]

Just my 0.02$
Günther

[qwerty]

As long it "somehow" works, efforts might be better put on feature enhancements and bug eliminations (keeping exactly this order).

You mean this is Sparx' policy, not a general recommendation? At least the two last topics need to be swapped!

q.

[g.makulik]

You mean this is Sparx' policy, not a general recommendation?

Yes, that was the intend!

At least the two last topics need to be swapped!

This also was intentionally to point out what's wrong ...

Regards,
Günther

[Kamal Hammoutene]

So it's a mystery that this forum is treated as a stepchild.

[business view]
As long it "somehow" works, efforts might be better put on feature enhancements and bug eliminations (keeping exactly this order).
[\business view]

Just my 0.02$
Günther

I'd rather read directly Sparx's point of view.

[qwerty]

You haven't noticed this is a user forum, have you?

q.

[Kamal Hammoutene]

You haven't noticed this is a user forum, have you?

q.

So who is the "user" that  I could contact for restructuring the forum so we can still have easy access to current and live threads?

[qwerty]

Someone at Sparx. Maybe their marketing department or the sales support.

q.

[Kamal Hammoutene]

Someone at Sparx. Maybe their marketing department or the sales support.

q.

in french;
CQFD  

[qwerty]

In Latin: Quod Erat Demonstrantum. Means: which is hereby proven. Not sure what's proven now. This IS a user forum, though Sparxians read and comment as well. But that's just courtesy. See also your discussion with Geert.

q.

[Geert Bellekens]

I know it won't help you directly, but you might still be interested to know that there are several initiatives at the moment to start EA user groups.
Hopefully, once these user groups have some body they can start weighing in on Sparx strategy as a sort of lobby groups.

Improving the forum, and allowing some kind of public access to reported issues and roadmaps would be high on my wish list.

Geert