Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: What's the official policy about the LibO website: Drupal or no Drupal?

A quote: Things grow unstructured.

TDF and LibO are two different although related things growing at
great pace since few weeks ago.

However I think that the structure for contribution is lagging behind for both.

I know that new TDF and LibO websites are ongoing. But I don't know
what really has to be done. Neither I know what has NOT to be done.

I just polished the structure of
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Website
and realized that there is an "official" major confusion between TDF
and LibO websites development.

In the mail list I see few of you with a clear picture of what has to
be done. But what about casual contributors such as me or Narayan. How
can we know what is a priority and what is not without seeking and
reading dozens of messages.

Most importantly: Many more will come and find themselves in the same situation.

I ask the ones with a rather clear top-down vision to do two things:
1.- Don't over use the mail list. Use the wiki to materialize cooled
down knowledge.
2.- Keep the wiki up to date (and structured).
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Website can't be up to date when
the URL is meaning "TDF website" and the first paragraph says "Welcome
to the LibreOffice Webpage development wiki"

First step: leave http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Website for
talking about the TDF website and create
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/LibO/... for LibreOffice topics.
LibreOffice website would come in
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/LibO/Website , etc.



On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 10:03 AM, Marc Paré <marc@marcpare.com> wrote:
> Le 2010-12-12 03:47, Stefan Weigel a écrit :
> Hi Stefan:
>
> > Well:
> >
> > <quote>
> > during our yesterday's call, the CMS decision was taken: it will be
> > Silverstripe as a starter, with plans to migrate to Drupal later on.
> > </quote>
> >
> > To me, "plans to migrate to Drupal later on" does not necessarily
> > mean, that there actually will be a migration to Drupal.
>
> Hmmm, I don't know how more implicit this would be.
>
> > And, the SCM minutes clearly read:
> >
> > <quote>
> > suggestion is that the website team should do some more planning,
> > what we need regarding website, additional services, and see how
> > this can be achieved with drupal. We see the need of a more
> > sophisticated CMS in the future.
> > </quote>
>
> Yes, this, when taken in context, was a comment on the Drupal team not being
> as organised in the beginning. Most of the Drupal people were busy with
> their employment commitments and had somehow been caught short in presenting
> a sample CMS for the SC. However, the documentation was well presented. You
> would have to read the whole thread to get a feel for it.
>
> > To me, this means, that there has to be further evaluation and an
> > that migrating to drupal depends on a future decision by the SC.
> >
> > Pse, don´t get me wrong: I am *not* against Drupal. But we should
> > recognize, what has been decided yet and what not.
> >
> > Stefan
>
> Marc
>
>
> --
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+help@libreoffice.org
> List archive: http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
> *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***



-- 
"Make sure that Office documents very well depends on PROPRIETARY IE
capabilities."
    Bill Gates, 1998.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+help@libreoffice.org
List archive: http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***