create new tag
, view all tags

Improving the morale of the inner TWiki community

As possibly the person with the lowest morale, I'm either the best or worst person to start this subject. Not sure which. But morale is low overall, although it's probably not true for everyone and obviously i can't speak except in the broadest possible terms for anyone but myself. This is not good for TWiki or TWiki users or the larger TWiki community.

Some general points:

  • None of us work for twiki.org. None of us work for Peter. He may be able to control what happens with twiki.org and, to a lesser extent, to the code base, but TWiki is a communal effort.
    • Communal efforts takes ressources, but more than anything they take time.
  • None of us is paid to support TWiki in #twiki or in Support. The project would be better off if those who can contribute code or documentation spent their time on that. (Although if someone likes helping people, go for it!)
    • _You_ are the the judge of where your energy will help the project the most. We will appreciate your effort where you put it.
    • Some do. Some even express it.
  • When the same support questions are asked over and over again, there's probably a problem in the documentation. (I used to help people in #twiki, but got burnt out by the same questions being asked over and over again.)
    • You are allowed to burn out. Others will step in when you need a "ride in the helicopter" to see things from the top again.
    • You miss the point. This is not about burnout. This is about serious lacks in the documentation.*

  • Lack of appreciation, negative feedback, or a sense of futility leads to people to focus more on what is in their own interest and less on "contributing".
    • Don't expect feedback for every little thing you do. Lay out your tracks clearly, preach your mission and allow us to follow.
    • I doubt anyone does. General lack of appreciation is another matter. Preaching is boring and for preachers. Not to mention that preachers tend to get derided around here.
  • Most people don't respond well to negative feedback.
    • Many people respond well to constructive collaboration.
  • Most people don't respond well to passive-aggresive behaviour, such as the intentional use of silence. Shunning is rude and counterproductive.
    • You can get burnt out by being asked to state the same point multiple times. When you ask, listen for an intention and seek consensus or alternative roads.
    • A stated intention to use silence is bad leadership. Ignoring a participant in a three-way discussion is rude and counterproductive.
  • Not everyone is a "team player". This is probably more typical on OSS projects than elsewhere. If that's more important than what a person contribute, then make it clear up front so that said people learn right away to work on a different project.
    • Koffee Anan will get along in his way, John Wayne in his - your behaviour will affect the behaviour of others.

  • Unpleasant truths should be allowed to be expressed. They don't go away just because they are stifled. Airing them allows them to be dealt with; forcing them to be kept in -- or discussed privately -- leads to resentment, schisms, and (at least partial) departures.
    • Try a constructive approach if you want to change the behaviour you see in others.
    • So we should bury unpleasant truths? Good plan.
  • Sometimes people vent. Let them. Otherwise feelings may fester.
    • Letting off steam is only human. Regretting, making up and taking back harsh words even more so.
  • When people have expressed similar opinions, that probably shows a real issue. If nothing changes except for the opinions no longer being discussed, that probably means the discussion has moved privately. This is not good good for a project.
    • Often you will have to seek compromise; reaching a consensus will take longer and more effort than you expect.
    • Try looking at all of the topics that were seriously discussed, then died, and not because they were bad ideas.. Ask Martin in particular about some of those. The process is (often) broken.

-- Contributors: MeredithLesly, SteffenPoulsen


I realise I've stepped on some tender toes and pissed some people off. I'm no good at politics or being politic (not the same thing). So undoubtedly there are some deservedly negative feelings towards me. At the same time, (IMO) I've contributed a lot to this project in the short time I've been involved and feel generally very underappreciated for this. Not by everyone, but by certain key people. Perhaps some people respond well to negative feedback, but I've never been one of them. And I doubt that anyone responds well to being shunned, as someone put it. So the only thing that will be accomplished by these behaviours to drive me from the project. (Whether that's the goal or not is an exercise left to the reader.

i'm only going to mention one person by name, because I think it's a good example of an imperfect but workable collegial relationship. Kenneth and I have had some strong disagreements. We've also managed, by and large, to work them out without hard feelings (on my part at least, and I think on his part as well.) We are very different in many ways, but we also share the misfortune of sometimes reacting over-emotionally and the good fortune of not holding grudges. I've also listened to his concerns, both general ones and some particular to me, and I've done my best to let him know when I agreed with him, which is perhaps more often than others may realise. He's also gone out of his way to thank me for certain efforts on my part, some in response to his concerns and some just because he appreciated them. So while I'm not sure we'd do well at all in a physical work environment, we are a pretty good example of people who can work as EtherColleagues.

In brief, I am not an "innocent victim", but I have been victimised to some extent. Probably not the only one but, again, I can't speak for anyone else. Shunning, scapegoating, and focusing only the negative hurt any project, but especiallly an OSS one. We're not paid to work on it and it's all too easy for the negatives to overwhelm any reasons to keep volunteering.

-- MeredithLesly - 09 Jul 2006

I hate it to agree with Meredith. wink

-- FranzJosefSilli - 09 Jul 2006

I have to apologise, but I've never gotten your winks. Are you serious that you hate to agree with me? I certainly haven't always put things the best way possible, to put it mildly, but I think I've been right a lot more than than I've been wrong. I really don't know how to interpret this. :/

-- MeredithLesly - 09 Jul 2006

For many of us, our work with TWiki is about giving things in our own setting a perspective. Tracing events, enabling a shared vision.

Often this is done in an enterprise setting, trying to build a history of and a strategy around our work there.

We like it when things fit nicely on top of each other (a seldom experience, yes .. but it happens :-)).

I agree, I think you have contributed a lot. But at the same time I think you have failed to share your vision of where you see us going together as a project, what you see our history is going to be.

Often we are told that you are going to leave TWiki. That TWiki shouldn't have been done in perl. That TWiki will never work and is going nowhere. That plugins you have done are your own, and no one better touch them. "Sigh" is an often used word, still.

My personal interpreter is left with an overall view that goes something like: "Wow, look at all that code we need to consider internalizing once Meredith gives up on TWiki. Now, let me concentrate on something else while waiting for things to stabilize in that area .."

I think it is great to see you experiment with new ways of working. I.e. I see you are using #twiki less, involving yourself less in personal matters in Codev, doing less iterations per Item in Bugs:WebHome, moving focus from DEVELOP to TWikiRelease04x00 branch, etc. Instead you seem to be spending more energy in SVN - but you are also feeling underappreciated.

As you say your morale is low, and I could assume this change in behaviour is part of an investigational effort; exploring how to get the highest rate back from the investment so far (both in terms of software but - probably more important - also appreciation-wise).

I don't know what conclusion your investigation will lead you to; I realize there is a high probablity that at some sudden point you will choose to abandon TWiki entirely. But I think there is also a - less likely - chance you will find that even though you are challenged in having the development of TWiki always go your way exactly, it is still worth an effort to stick with it.

If I knew of a formula to produce appreciation and recognition in a group I would have told it to you - but as far as I am aware there are none.

Excellent to learn that you have found out that you do not respond well to negative feedback. It is a good lead-on to an empathic exercise where one assumes what is found to be true for one self could be true for others smile

-- SteffenPoulsen - 10 Jul 2006

You are not the ideal person for me to respond to, as you are one of those who are lavishly praised, Nonetheless...

I came to TWiki with a ton of enthusiasm. You weren't around then. Perhaps my timing was bad, because a lot of what I wanted to do then is now being discussed actively now. But the reaction then was "NO NO NO" instead of "not right now", and so I learned not to try. To keep my efforts as private as possible. To keep them out of the line of fire. Which, of course, means that I'm contributing far less than I might have done otherwise.

I am not, of course, the only perosn whose morale is low. I didn't mean to make this topic all about me, although I can't (and shouldn't) speak for anyone else. There was a period where a number of people were speaking freely in #twiki and then we were, in effect, told to shut up. So we did, for the most part. There's plenty of evidence of low morale in others if one only looks. If one cares about morale, of course.

To try and generalise, rather than just make it about me

(And I've known for a long long time that I don't respond well to negative feedback. This isn't something I've learned from my experience with TWiki. I just didn't expect to receive so much on an OSS project, where everything one contributes is a contribution in the literal sense.)

-- MeredithLesly - 10 Jul 2006

First of all, let me make that disclaimer that I am not in TWiki's core group and probably have contributed infinitely less than you, Meredith. I do follow TWiki very closely and at least once a day read through the topic changes (at least the ones that sound interesting).

That said, since I've had some experience as a team leader, I can tell you first hand that most managers crave creative individuals who are always ready to challenge the status quo, but most of all are good team players. A fractured team can never perform effectively.

It takes a lot of self-discipline to give and take constructive critisism, since the first instinct is to always protect one's turf. I've always felt your attitude to be too confrontational. I'll just pick one example: in the "use strict for all modules" discussion you keep accusing people of not knowing basic Perl, whereas you should be educating them of the usefulness of the pragma. Building a level of trust, especially for a virtual development team where most people don't even know what the rest look like, is the most important activity. Remember that it cannot be "bought", it takes a long time to accumulate a cache of goodwill, but it can all be lost in a moment of idiocy.

The TWiki community really appreciates your contributions, especially the tag stuff. I would however venture a guess that this is not the first occasion or environment where you have felt like this.

I only speak for myself, not for the TWiki community in general, and probably won't comment further on this topic. I hope that instead of taking it as a personal attack (for which I have no motive whatsoever), you can extract some positives out of this message.

-- PankajPant - 10 Jul 2006

I certainly don't take this as a personal attack. If you're interested and consider it worth the the time, trying looking in the logs at how I approached things in February and March (when I first joined the project) because it will give you some context as to my attitude now. I wasn't (intentionally) challenging the status quo at all. I didn't know Perl and and I came to TWiki because I thought it was the coolest thing around. (I still think the idea is; discovering the reality has been dismaying.) The only thing I could contribute at that point was writing better documentation, but it was made very clear very quickly that my skills in this area weren't wanted. And so it went.

There is nothing to say about use strict; except that it should always be used, with the very rare exception of when one has to turn it off briefly. I learned that from Perl books and reading the TWiki code. It is in EmptyPlugin with a comment, so one hopes that any new plugins are using it. It is in every single core module, I believe. I'd be very surprised it it weren't strongly recommended in every decent Perl book. (My ancient "Programming Perl" book sums it up quite concisely: strict -- Restrict Unsafe Constructs.)

-- MeredithLesly - 10 Jul 2006

Don't underestimate the factor of time.

-- SteffenPoulsen - 10 Jul 2006


-- MeredithLesly - 10 Jul 2006

I was thinking of the comment "Perhaps my timing was bad, because a lot of what I wanted to do then is now being discussed actively now" - imho it is mainly your effort that has changed this, it has just taken some months to accomplish. Things Take Time.

-- SteffenPoulsen - 11 Jul 2006

And People Give Up.

-- MeredithLesly - 11 Jul 2006

Considering options, including focusing ones energy somewhere else than with TWiki is always a good idea for an individual.

A thing that always fascinated me with John Wayne is that even though he is an expert in clearing a town of problems, the ending scene is always his exit from the exact same town. Being part of the now secure (but boring?) daily life is not for him.

As you state, not everybody are team players. I think some are more interested in riding in, rising the town to the next level and then ride on.

In the cases where the town takes longer than expected to rise, the loner can "Give Up" or "Give Time". I agree, we will probably see "Give Up" more often than "Give Time", which is to be expected.

I don't know if things like the new TWikiReleaseManagerRole that is being evaluated will help the TWiki community in successfully shortening paths around new development - but I am curious enough that I will stick around to see the outcome (and of course I cross my fingers that it will).

-- SteffenPoulsen - 11 Jul 2006

One thing you fail to note is that some of the more important people still left on the TWiki project aren't team players. Should they move along as well, if playing well with others is more important than talent, ability, and willingness to write good code?

-- MeredithLesly - 12 Jul 2006

Anybody that doesn't feel spending time and effort with TWiki is the right thing[TM] is hopefully going to move along at some point, yes - at least that would be my hope for the poor bastard smile

I think as a project we are trying to cater as much room as possible for all types of personalities and talents. In this sense I don't feel we are going in the wrong direction or?

-- SteffenPoulsen - 12 Jul 2006

And I obviously disagree. There is clear preference from the top for "team players". The problem is that creative programmers tend not to be team players by nature. And the fact that there are a lot of problems left over from previous versions makes it difficult for people who come on board recently. At least for the high-level programmer types like me.

Also note the dead silence from the entire Core Group. That in itself speaks volumes about many of my points and part of why morale is so low. Leadership that doesn't care about morale gets what it deserves.

-- MeredithLesly - 13 Jul 2006

For my part I am really more curious if it doesn't speak more about what kind of result your current arguing style seems to get you?

-- SteffenPoulsen - 14 Jul 2006

This topic stayed focused on MeredithLesly. It's not. Over the years the attitude of several of TWiki developers have changed from "total enthusiasm" to either "Don't care" (those who stay and wade through the status quo trying to solve their problems, ignoring the rest) or "Don't bother" (those who go away).

Speaking for myself, I can say that to push even a minor change that is against the status quo, defining status quo as "whatever pleases (no name to protect the guilty) at the time", is very, very hard. First you need to gain momentum with the developers, and THEN push the idea through the last barrier. Sometimes this is very difficult, time-consuming, and energy-consuming. And, at the end, there is no guarantee that it will pass. And the idea remains "forgotten" until there is a new kid on the block that says "wouldn't be nice if" and then a senior says "look at these topics, it was discussed before and died". And if the kid tries to push too hard, he'll receive the reminder "don't push too hard, or you'll be burned" (I received it).

THAT is hampering the morale. That nearly every discussion about a new feature ends up with fighting or is just left to die slowly unless someone goes and implement it anyway. That discussing on Codev seems futile, it's better to just check-in and then receive the flak and risk reversion. That meetings that discuss anything outside the "release of the next version" are more than likely to degenerate in a heated discussion with no conclusion other than "let's discuss on Codev" with the usual result.

And that just because MereditLesly is bitching and yelling louder about it, people like (you know who you are) dismiss it as just "the bitching of a bitching girl".

There IS a problem in the TWiki community. That has been said a lot of times by a lot of people. And has been always ignored. And we're not precisely moving in the direction to solve it. We're more like trying to walk around it.

-- RafaelAlvarez - 14 Jul 2006

A lot of steam in this topic. Can we have some actual proposals to make the TWiki project more enjoyable/successful? Or any other advice?

-- ArthurClemens - 14 Jul 2006

I'm sorry, but I have to differ with Rafael and Meredith. My morale could hardly be better. Almost every day I discover something which can be done with TWiki (in most cases without writing a single line of Perl code) for which I have never found an equivalent in other wikis. During the past week I got three new contributors to my corporate TWiki, which is an increase of 100% (I knew in advance that it would start slow).

I am observing TWiki for about one year now, and it ain't that bad. I concede there are things that I dislike. Really dislike. In the code, in the processes, in the community. But well - shrug - so what? Nobody sent me a bill so far. If I really badly need a function which isn't accepted, then I can always sulk in my corner and keep it as my private patch file. You wouldn't even notice. I don't need to force it into SVN.

This may be special for me since I don't have too much time to spend for TWiki, so all my "plans" are somewhat indefinite in time. But whenever I find that one of my ideas doesn't get resonance, that doesn't affect my morale for more than some minutes to steam off. I have a great choice of other ideas on my stack, I know that I'll never get through them all in my life anyway.

Be honest, friends: At least a part of low morale always is coming from the discovery that you yourself can't do as much for TWiki as you planned to do. And it's not only always someone else's fault. Many of you, and I myself, and many of the "Core Group", have announced plans which from my experience with software development span several years if done right. But despite the fact that we're all using SVN, TWiki has not yet become a "collaborative development": Everybody is centered around his own ideas, everybody is left alone with the difficulties. You practically have to commit to get the attention of the "community". And because the others don't care, why bother with documentation in advance? In PankajPant's words, we are a fractured team. But once you've accepted the fact, you can get over it.

On the other hand, there are exceptions. One example has been mentioned: Meredith noted that SteffenPoulsen is "lavishly praised". Please, Meredith, take a close look: Isn't that the case because Steffen has fixed an incredible number of plugins for Dakar, and because he is patiently answering dozens of support queries, without ever demanding that "the community" follows his ideas? Check his SVN commits, and compare the list with his personal roadmap. And if you don't find his personal roadmap you might get the picture.

Or, another example: Did you notice the amount of bugs which CrawfordCurrie fixed during Dakar's beta? And how many of the bugs have been introduced by enhancements of other developers which had run out of steam? He would have had enough reason to complain much more than he did (by occasionaly trying to prod others).

Rafael notes low morale due to the fact "that discussing on Codev seems futile, it's better to just check-in and then receive the flak and risk reversion". In that case, I seem to be pretty immune to this effect. Just recently, around CleanUpTWikiVariables/OrganizeTWikiVariables, I dared to submit a 2000 lines patch, and I got flak. I admit I've been disappointed, but only for about half an hour. And as you can see, I'm again writing in Codev, to a topic where I was really sure that I would never ever get involved. And at some more or less undefined point in time I'll get the automatic registration stuff done, though nobody in the core team is interested.

And I'm still full of ideas, and short of time. Only if it were the other way around I would need ImprovingMorale.

-- HaraldJoerg - 14 Jul 2006

I'm sorry, Harald, but you can't actually disagree with most of what Raf and I said. We're observing general behaviour and feelings, not ones that apply to each and every person. I'm glad to hear that your morale is good. That does not change the fact that many others' morale, not just mine, is low.

Steffen deserves praise for fixing many plugins. He also didn't know the importance of use strict. Has the "fixed" plugins been re-fixed? Will they be? Just because he can't reproduce a problem doesn't mean it's not there. It's nice and a little strange that he doesn't mind being embarrassed, but it might be good if he looked at the reasons for the embarassment rather than just not minding. The list of plugins that don't use the directive that are listed as working with Dakar is embarrassingly long.

Junior programmers are probably vital to the survival of a project of this sort, but they are still junior programmers. It's great he's helping with support (although the number of repeat support questions is dismaying). It's not so great when he gives wrong answers, or has someone jump through hoops because SP didn't understand what was involved. Personally, I'd rather get no answer than a wrong answer. One may piss me off but I'm more likely to ask again. The other wastes my time and then will definitely piss me off for having wasted the time. In the end, Steffen's enthusiasm and energy is praise-worthy but, I'm sorry, fixing plugins (probably mostly in an acceptable manner fingers crossed) and being patient enough to answer the same question for the 100th time shouldn't be the high water mark for praise. If it is, then that alone says something not so good about a lot of what's hurting morale.

Now, CDot... well, I don' t know how CDot keeps going, to be honest. Even now, when his attention is necessarily focused on making an income, he still finds time to help in support (and to help me as well when we manage to speak on the same page, or at least the same chapter). OTOH, well, he said it himself: he doesn't recommend the experience of rolling back changes at the last minute because they're deemed "non-TWiki". I wasn't around during the pre-Dakar times, so I have no idea if he was praised as much as Steffen is. I sure hope so. (Sorry, Sven, I know you've worked hard in the past and are working hard now, but your name wasn't taken in vain here.)

Arthur: I tried to make some general points, rather than just make it about me. Obviously I didn't succeed very well. As I see very little hope for improving morale, I'm the wrong person to be coming up with proposals. I started the topic in part to vent but largely because I hoped people would come up with proposals. Or, at the very least, that he who shall not be named would actually care that many people's morale was low and not just shoot the messenger. Oh well.

I've never thought I was important to TWiki and I still don't. It touched me more than I can say that Martin gave me a TWikiHeart. But I've also done a lot of work and, while certain people like Martin have made me feel good and appreciated and all that, mostly I feel my time with TWiki has been a waste of time and energy and emotion. And I'm quite sure that my project would have been done with a lot less effort and in less time and with a lot less misery had I done it in Ruby on Rails. And it would have been still would have been a 'structured wiki", whatever that really means, and run a lot faster than it's running. (That last may kill it within next week, alas). Not everyone is a programmer, so not everyone could do that. But only non-programmers should think that wiki engines are the only alternative to TWIki. (But that's another subject, which I doubt I'll pursue through any official channels.)

-- MeredithLesly - 14 Jul 2006

Harald, either you misunderstand me or I misunderstand you. I never said that commiting a patch and get the flak ever dishearten me. What disheartens me is the lack of feedback on ideas.

Let me restate it: If you have an Idea and write it on Codev, unless is something so badly needed by many people it will wither and die, specially if is "not good for me" (for some values of me). On the other hand, creating the topic on Codev, implement your idea, post the patch, wait a week and commit your patch will give you a lot more result: Either feedback will start to flow with things that people like/dislike, or the commit is completely ignored. In either case, is a win: There is feedback, so it can be enchanced, or there is no feedback and now TWiki is a better application.

So, what I do think is lowering morale? Perhaps is the feeling that sometimes working in TWiki and getting involved with the community feels like swiming on a pool full of mercury. That and the fact that some ideas are dismissed without giving them a try.

What keeps my morale "high" even if I feel "depressed" sometimes? The fact that inside TWiki there is an even greater application waiting to go out, and to be part of it is exciting.

What can we do to enhance morale? Be true. If we want to enhance the community, we should actually work to enhance the community. On the other hand, is we want to remain in the "confort zone" we're today, then state it. But saying "we want to be better, we're open, we collaborate" while remaining in the confort zone where there is little to no feedback sends contradictory signals to new developers.

Disclaimer: I'm not "away" from TWiki because my morale is low. I hardly have time for myself at the moment, but I still have few patches calling me from my hard drive begging to be integrated into DEVELOP.

-- RafaelAlvarez - 14 Jul 2006

Meredith: your obsession with use strict; is starting to go on my nerves.

Rafael: I see your point - that's practically what I wanted to say when I wrote we are a "fractured team". But this is what I am observing with so many open source projects. The amount of code which needs to be maintained, and to be understood if you want to contribute, is increasing over time, so it is becoming more and more difficult to get involved - what remains, is a couple of specialists, everyone in a part of the code. TWiki coders' base isn't very large, the code base is increasing - and many of us have other hobbies, too. That's what I think is the reason for the lack of discussion in Codev. But hey - Dakar is out now, we may have a little hangover. I think that as soon as two developers share interest in a certain area, their community of two will start to work....

-- HaraldJoerg - 15 Jul 2006

Fine. If you don't care about mod_perl users or Support questions who are answered to turn off various plugins to try and find a conflict when it's a simple problem, don't. I have this silly idea that we're supposed to be attempting to create reliable code, and there's a simple way to improve things that's being ignored. I wouldn't have even mentioned it had you not touted SP's "fixing" of all these plugins which aren't fixed by professional standards.

-- MeredithLesly - 15 Jul 2006

I do care for mod_perl users. I am using it, I wrote HowToWriteModPerlCompliantPlugins. I've just commented on your wrong assumption in UseStrict ("I think the issue with mod_perl is that anything without an scope has the scope of mod_perl"). use strict; might help to detect a bug, but does not fix anything.

-- HaraldJoerg - 15 Jul 2006

I see you have again put some references to the entity of me in the above, Meredith - I am only happy to comment.

As I have stated numerous times, I don't think highly of my Perl skills, no doubt about that smile

My main programming skill lies with J2EE development, so I believe I should really have chosen to go with something like XWiki or JSPWiki if I had an ambition of only contributing stuff I knew I could show off as "professional standard" code.

But TWiki is just so far ahead of the competion, and fits superbly to our needs in our team - so therefore we have easily chosen to tolerate Perl as the implementation language. As a consequence I must live with contributing code that is sometimes only as-good-as-it-gets. Of course this fact means I must fully trust that other contributors will help me in avoiding the worst pitfalls I might encounter in this not-primary-language territory - and I also feel I have been helped often.

And therefore I need to let you know Meredith that I am also very happy to know that you are in the set that are able to tell where I fail, as I know this also means you are able to help me out.

As an example you were able to help the user that had gotten into trouble in the Support issue in question, so the issue was quickly fixed without me dragging him through hoops. All in all I would say that this is really something that boosts my morale, working together with you and seeing how our collaboration really speeded up fixing issues smile

Therefore I am of course sad that you are going to leave our beloved TWiki so soon now, but at the other hand I am also very happy to know that your Ruby work (did you give it a name yet?) will bring much joy to both you and the thriving community I know you will build around it.

-- SteffenPoulsen - 15 Jul 2006

Yes, it has a name. No, it's not public yet. wink

-- MeredithLesly - 15 Jul 2006

> "use strict; might help to detect a bug, but does not fix anything."

If you get someone else's code that is not strict you know there's a higher chance that its got bugs in. use strict helps morale by reducing the time to surface issues, so its a promise of better quality.

A TWikiCommunityMoraleBarometer could be both an interesting social experiment and a dashboard measure for the leadership team.

-- MartinCleaver - 15 Jul 2006

Edit | Attach | Watch | Print version | History: r29 < r28 < r27 < r26 < r25 | Backlinks | Raw View | Raw edit | More topic actions
Topic revision: r29 - 2006-07-15 - MartinCleaver
  • Learn about TWiki  
  • Download TWiki
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by Perl Hosted by OICcam.com Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback. Ask community in the support forum.
Copyright © 1999-2018 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.