Re: New website

Helge Hess wrote:
> I'm not sure. I don't really like (_public_) Wikis for various reasons.

Well, they don't have to be public wiki in the way they are at 
wikipedia.org. I was more thinking along the way of fedoraproject.org. 
There you have a team of editors and only those can edit pages. I think 
Chris raised a very good issue. There should be a team for the 
documentation and the website. The way I see it there is currently no 
one who is really responsible for this. And there is no over all 
structure. (not even in Plone)

> But of course I'm happy to give people write access to the Svn 
> repository containing the website ... The website sources are living on
> 
>   http://svn.opengroupware.org/www/

Have you looked at the way mozilla.org is maintaining their website with 
https://doctor.mozilla.org/ ? I think this could be a way you like.

At the bottom of every page is a "Edit this page" link. From there you 
get to the doctor. Everyone can edit the page but only if you have the 
privileges the pages will be written into the CVS. If the editor doesn't 
have the privileges then he gets forwarded to bugzilla where he can 
submit the diff as a bug. A person from the editor team can then 
incorporate the diff into the CVS.

> I think the bigger question in the context is whether we want to 
> continue to provide precompiled packages at all. Maybe we should just 
> document the source build process properly and thats it.

In my opinion this is step into the wrong direction. I think there 
should even be fully functional apt- and yum-repositories. The 
installation should be a lot simpler than it is now. Adams idea with the 
Novell build-service is really good.


Raffael
-- 
OpenGroupware.org Discussion [email protected]
http://mail.opengroupware.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss