Hi Andrea, *,
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Andrea Pescetti
Marc Paré wrote:
A proper discussion would not fit the deadlines and tools the Document
Foundation has now: if a decision has to be taken now, it will miss the
bigger scope. If the Document Foundation must choose a tool that will be
flexible enough to rebuild all the current OpenOffice.org infrastructure
No. I strongly disagree. Not one tool that can do all.
(e.g.: OOo site; Extensions; TCM; QATrack),
And even that: Duplicating the extensions site would be a waste of
time and efforts. There are already two repositories, the OOo one, the
FSF one. It would be bad if there would be another one, just for the
sake of having it.
LO should be compatible to OOo in that regard, Extensions should run
on OOo, LO, other derivates, thus a dedicated site is a nogo.
then Drupal is that
tool; I can't imagine how to rebuild the Extensions site and all
processing in Silverstripe, for one.
It would involve creating an appropriate module. But again, I'd not
see that as a good idea.
The extensions site has a different target user group, and a different
contributers group, so I don't see any reason to try to cover it with
the same tool that is used for the website.
2) Moving to a database-based CMS can imply loss of traceability of
changes. The current CVS infrastructure, as bad as it can be, allows to
see a full log of changes very easily. Drupal has a killer feature here:
site settings can be exported to PHP code, shared among a distributed
development team through any revision control system (SVN, git,
whatever) and applied in a safe way to the running site. It is very
important that we are able to answer the question "Who enabled
this permission, when and why?"
Why is that a killer feature of drupal, why do you assume you can't
put silverstripe's configuration under version control?
What makes you think silverstripe wouldn't have a change history for the pages?
3) How do you plan to implement translations? (from a visitor's point
of view, not technically). I mean, the current http://www.openoffice.org
site is in English only; you need to go to http://de.openoffice.org to
see content in German, but that one is a totally different site. On the
other hand, the Silverstripe demo (and of course Drupal too) seems to
support translation of the single pages: but is that what you want?
Well, this is a reiteration of what has been discussed already. No, it
is not *all* that we want. That's why I did put the subsites
requirement on the list.
But it is /part/ of what is wanted.
what I could see (pumbaa has been down for me for the last two hours)
Yes, the machine (the host) was rebooted and the VM that hosts
silverstripe wasn't restarted.
E-mail to email@example.com for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-website] [SC] Decision about CMS · Christian Lohmaier
Re: [libreoffice-website] [SC] Decision about CMS · Marc Paré
Re: [libreoffice-website] [SC] Decision about CMS · Benjamin Horst
Impressum (Legal Info)
: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our trademark policy