From discuss@opengroupware.org Thu Oct 18 21:01:26 2007 From: discuss@opengroupware.org (Raffael Luthiger) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 22:01:26 +0200 Subject: [OGo-Discuss] New website Message-ID: <4717BB96.40502@huanga.com> Adam Tauno Williams wrote: >> Do you plan to make the website wiki-style later on? I could imagine >> that the install section would be kept (more) up-to-date this way. I was >> in the situation as well that I wanted to update some parts of the >> install section because it would have helped others. But I turned away >> because I couldn't do it. > > All good questions, but over on the discuss list http://mail.opengroupware.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss please. OK. I moved it over here. From discuss@opengroupware.org Thu Oct 18 21:58:43 2007 From: discuss@opengroupware.org (Helge Hess) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 22:58:43 +0200 Subject: [OGo-Discuss] New website In-Reply-To: <4717BB96.40502@huanga.com> References: <4717BB96.40502@huanga.com> Message-ID: <5AB0FC5C-B5D9-4375-9D0F-75F1E59185A1@opengroupware.org> On 18.10.2007, at 22:01, Raffael Luthiger wrote: > Adam Tauno Williams wrote: > >> Do you plan to make the website wiki-style later on? I could > imagine > >> that the install section would be kept (more) up-to-date this > way. I was > >> in the situation as well that I wanted to update some parts of the > >> install section because it would have helped others. But I > turned away > >> because I couldn't do it. > > > > All good questions, but over on the discuss list http:// > mail.opengroupware.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss please. > > OK. I moved it over here. I'm not sure. I don't really like (_public_) Wikis for various reasons. 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/ 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. Thanks, Helge -- Helge Hess http://www.helgehess.eu/ From discuss@opengroupware.org Thu Oct 18 22:07:10 2007 From: discuss@opengroupware.org (Adam Tauno Williams) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 17:07:10 -0400 Subject: [OGo-Discuss] New website In-Reply-To: <4717BB96.40502@huanga.com> References: <4717BB96.40502@huanga.com> Message-ID: <1192741630.7204.16.camel@WM_ADAM1.morrison.iserv.net> --=-5g7EEZy1GAe7s4bEYug9 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > OK. I moved it over here. :) >> Do you plan to make the website wiki-style later on? I could imagine We have the doc's plone where anyone can contribute and post whatever they want. Albeit it is a bit of a mess, but it works. >> that the install section would be kept (more) up-to-date this way. I=20 >> was in the situation as well that I wanted to update some parts of >> the install section because it would have helped others. But I turned >> away because I couldn't do it Currently I think the site has to be updated through subversion, at least that was the method at one point. I had/have commit access to a section of it (POGI) but it was/is kind of clumsy. I should check if it still works. There was a longish thread back in 2005 - http://osdir.com/ml/cms.opengroupware.discuss.general/2005-06/msg00020.html= - about the website. Probably worth a read. --=-5g7EEZy1GAe7s4bEYug9 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4-svn0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBHF8r+LRePpNle04MRAhpxAJ9ol5kYwFlP1tMBry/j/uSWUNn9tACdGgUH mTfbLw1/Z2cZmp3HljjI1p0= =K+Qo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-5g7EEZy1GAe7s4bEYug9-- From discuss@opengroupware.org Thu Oct 18 22:10:17 2007 From: discuss@opengroupware.org (Adam Tauno Williams) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 17:10:17 -0400 Subject: [OGo-Discuss] New website In-Reply-To: <5AB0FC5C-B5D9-4375-9D0F-75F1E59185A1@opengroupware.org> References: <4717BB96.40502@huanga.com> <5AB0FC5C-B5D9-4375-9D0F-75F1E59185A1@opengroupware.org> Message-ID: <1192741817.7204.21.camel@WM_ADAM1.morrison.iserv.net> --=-E2xN+9jTjshx13xKb9tk Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > >> Do you plan to make the website wiki-style later on? I could =20 > > imagine > > >> that the install section would be kept (more) up-to-date this =20 > > way. I was > > >> in the situation as well that I wanted to update some parts of the > > >> install section because it would have helped others. But I =20 > > turned away > > >> because I couldn't do it. > > > All good questions, but over on the discuss list http://=20 > > mail.opengroupware.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss please. > > OK. I moved it over here. > I'm not sure. I don't really like (_public_) Wikis for various reasons. I agree; generally they will with partial and obsolete junk. =20 Sort of like the docs plone. :) > But of course I'm happy to give people write access to the Svn =20 > repository containing the website ... The website sources are living on > http://svn.opengroupware.org/www/ > I think the bigger question in the context is whether we want to =20 > continue to provide precompiled packages at all. Or just provide them via the Novell build service; and the distributions they don't support, oh well... I've got at least libFoundation and SOPE building. > Maybe we should just document the source build process properly and thats= it. Would work for me. Fewer, better, docs are much easier to maintain. --=-E2xN+9jTjshx13xKb9tk Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4-svn0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBHF8u5LRePpNle04MRArDRAJ9YwvTc1JVMocw5hJo6CwX9+1BbKgCfWCdh fTApTIZObPHu+Sze/HWn/go= =ZD6u -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-E2xN+9jTjshx13xKb9tk-- From discuss@opengroupware.org Thu Oct 18 22:39:30 2007 From: discuss@opengroupware.org (Chris Herrnberger) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 17:39:30 -0400 Subject: [OGo-Discuss] New website In-Reply-To: <5AB0FC5C-B5D9-4375-9D0F-75F1E59185A1@opengroupware.org> References: <4717BB96.40502@huanga.com> <5AB0FC5C-B5D9-4375-9D0F-75F1E59185A1@opengroupware.org> Message-ID: <200710181739.30992.chris123@magma.ca> On Thursday 18 October 2007 04:58:43 pm Helge Hess wrote: > 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. And if you or someone else could write a script as we had before that=20 downloads and builds from source, you have it made provided the script chec= ks=20 for dependencies and directs the end user what is missing. The user would=20 have to get these themselves to keep it simple and avoid the myriad of=20 updating systems.=20 Downloads could come from the existing ftp server or svn server depending t= he=20 requirement for stable or trunk. So one script for stable production and on= e=20 for latest testing and development.=20 =46rom a marketing perspective, and I hate to sound like a droid, its impor= tant=20 to facilitate ease of installation for the end user regardless if its a sma= ll=20 business setting or developer setting to ensure exposure, growth and=20 adoption. Even if the sole intend is to sell the commercial version which i= s=20 not the direction of this project.=20 Then there would only be the need for two sets of installation instructions= :=20 Stable and Testing.=20 =46or example, Im currently running on Ubuntu and OpenSuSE. SuSE is a snap= =20 thanks to Adams work and that of others. Ubuntu.....well after several=20 attempts its still in the dark of the joys of groupware..:)=20 On a final note. doc.opengroupware was always conceived as end user driven.= I=20 no longer have the time to maintain it and so several members were given=20 admin priveledges. So in the end, the quality of documentation there is=20 random, some is excellent some is not. As with any GPL project unless there= =20 is a dedicated doc team docs will always be lacking regardless of what=20 platform the media is hosted. Those who care will contribute as we have=20 witnessed by some of the outstanding contribs over the years. Have a=20 complaint, well a good way to satiate that urge is to put pen to paper or=20 play with keyboard after researching the issue or problem. That way everyon= e=20 wins.=20 Best always=20 =2D-=20 Chris Herrnberger From discuss@opengroupware.org Thu Oct 18 23:08:39 2007 From: discuss@opengroupware.org (Adam Tauno Williams) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 18:08:39 -0400 Subject: [OGo-Discuss] New website In-Reply-To: <200710181739.30992.chris123@magma.ca> References: <4717BB96.40502@huanga.com> <5AB0FC5C-B5D9-4375-9D0F-75F1E59185A1@opengroupware.org> <200710181739.30992.chris123@magma.ca> Message-ID: <1192745319.5345.8.camel@aleph> > n a final note. doc.opengroupware was always conceived as end user driven. I > no longer have the time to maintain it and so several members were given > admin priveledges. I've got a question about the doc plone: as an administrator how the @^&^@*& does one go about deleting something? Search for SPAM / crap is pretty easy but I can't find any mechanism I'd even consider sane for deleting content. I can delete the user, but that doesn't stop the content from appearing in a search, making it a really clumsy way to clean things up. And there is allot of obnoxious material in the plone. > So in the end, the quality of documentation there is > random, some is excellent some is not. As is natural for such a thing; I'm OK with that and am comfortable with that in a plone/wiki/etc... But it would be good to be able to easily maintain a small subset of core canonical documentation to help users get moving down the road. That, IMHO, in addition to providing news, is the role of a "website". From discuss@opengroupware.org Thu Oct 18 23:45:03 2007 From: discuss@opengroupware.org (Raffael Luthiger) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 00:45:03 +0200 Subject: [OGo-Discuss] New website In-Reply-To: <5AB0FC5C-B5D9-4375-9D0F-75F1E59185A1@opengroupware.org> References: <4717BB96.40502@huanga.com> <5AB0FC5C-B5D9-4375-9D0F-75F1E59185A1@opengroupware.org> Message-ID: <4717E1EF.5060102@huanga.com> 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