Re: [Debconf-team] website presence meeting: crunch time.

[Gunnar Wolf]

Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) dijo [Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 10:32:28AM +0200]:
> I also don't see the need to battle them out. We have a few people
> strongly in favour of wafer and no one against it (at least as far as I
> could track). martin has brought up Odoo before, but has said that he's
> going to try it out at another conference first and report back to the
> DebConf team next year on how that works out.
> 
> I would rather suggest adding it to the next formal meeting (or maybe
> with at least a week notice if anyone wants to prepare/research
> anything) as an agenda item that we're finalizing website framework
> based on current consensus and take it from there.

I'm replying as I had made a suggestion of adopting Drupal. I still
believe it is flexible enough to cover (at least, most of) DebConf's
needs in at least as good a fashion as the systems we have used over
the past few years.

But OTOH, even if I take a firm time commitment to be available (which
is my intention, but I have learnt not to trust my intentions too much
;-) ), I completely agree with you. There are many Wafer
enthusiasts. That makes it quite better suited than anything I can
come up with, so let me withdraw my proposition.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Debconf-team mailing list
Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org
http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team

Re: [Debconf-team] website presence meeting: crunch time.

[Jonathan Carter]

On 06/10/2015 20:43, Gunnar Wolf wrote:

Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) dijo [Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 10:32:28AM +0200]:

I also don't see the need to battle them out. We have a few people
strongly in favour of wafer and no one against it (at least as far as I
could track). martin has brought up Odoo before, but has said that he's
going to try it out at another conference first and report back to the
DebConf team next year on how that works out.

I would rather suggest adding it to the next formal meeting (or maybe
with at least a week notice if anyone wants to prepare/research
anything) as an agenda item that we're finalizing website framework
based on current consensus and take it from there.


I'm replying as I had made a suggestion of adopting Drupal. I still
believe it is flexible enough to cover (at least, most of) DebConf's
needs in at least as good a fashion as the systems we have used over
the past few years.


Ah yes, quite right. Bernelle did mention that before but I think I 
might have missed your original suggestion before (I was a late-comer to 
the debconf-team list).



But OTOH, even if I take a firm time commitment to be available (which
is my intention, but I have learnt not to trust my intentions too much
;-) ), I completely agree with you. There are many Wafer
enthusiasts. That makes it quite better suited than anything I can
come up with, so let me withdraw my proposition.


I hope not on my account, but that would certainly make reaching an 
overwhelming consensus easier which will help move things along. Who 
knows maybe you'll learn to love Wafer/Django/Python as well :)


-Jonathan

___
Debconf-team mailing list
Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org
http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team

Re: [Debconf-team] website presence meeting: crunch time.

[Jonathan Carter (highvoltage)]

Hi!

On 05/10/2015 07:28, Eric Dantan Rzewnicki wrote:
>> * Then I put the advantages and disadvantages for each 'contender'.
>> The way this is written feels very battle-like, which is not (really)
>> intended. If you have another way of summarising this, please go ahead
>> (a table in a wiki?) The point is that at the meeting I don't want to
>> go through all of this, it should be clear by then.
> 
> Wafer seems to have the momentum, so its ok with me if we skip the
> battle and just figure out who's going to do what to make wafer work for
> DC16 (and beyond).

I also don't see the need to battle them out. We have a few people
strongly in favour of wafer and no one against it (at least as far as I
could track). martin has brought up Odoo before, but has said that he's
going to try it out at another conference first and report back to the
DebConf team next year on how that works out.

I would rather suggest adding it to the next formal meeting (or maybe
with at least a week notice if anyone wants to prepare/research
anything) as an agenda item that we're finalizing website framework
based on current consensus and take it from there.

-Jonathan

___
Debconf-team mailing list
Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org
http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team

[Debconf-team] website presence meeting: crunch time.

[Bernelle Verster]

Hi all

PyConZA is over which means it's website time.

I don't think we'll find a time for everyone to attend the meeting, so
we need to be clear on the meeting objectives and make this as
cooperative as possible. Bear this in mind and put your thoughts in
the titanpad [1] accordingly so that your voice is heard. Ideally,
then, it won't matter who attends, and hey, then we can even settle
this over email!

May I suggest Wednesday 18:00 UTC just because I see no other
alternative. Please feel free to suggest another day/time.

* The main meeting objective:
Decide on which system(s) are being developed as contenders for the
DC16 website. (If we feel we can decide to only go with wafer, that
would be *amazing*)
* Secondary objective:
Decide on a deadline for the contenders to show their stuff so we can
make a final decision. Winner takes all. Current suggestion is 31
October.

Then, to get as much discussion done before then, on the titanpad [1],
I suggest:

* Can we get an idea for what is in the running, and who is driving it?
Systems intended to show convincing argument by deadline, and lead
person driving it:
wafer (hodgestar)
odoo? (madduck?)
(edrz?)
(Ganneff?)
Drupal (gwolf)?
(Modify as appropriate on the titanpad, not in the email thread)

* Then I put the advantages and disadvantages for each 'contender'.
The way this is written feels very battle-like, which is not (really)
intended. If you have another way of summarising this, please go ahead
(a table in a wiki?) The point is that at the meeting I don't want to
go through all of this, it should be clear by then.

Everyone involved/interested should know by the start of the meeting:
1) What systems are going to be developed to a convincing point by the
deadline (possibly end of October), and who will be driving each
process
2) What are the general feelings for the advantages and disadvantages of each.
This meeting is NOT for people to argue for systems that they won't be
helping to develop. That you can do before the meeting, on the
titanpad.

In the event that we deal with this in a short time, there's a few
other agenda points like Visual Design we can focus on, which is much
more fun.

regards
B

[1] - https://titanpad.com/443gTylF6p
___
Debconf-team mailing list
Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org
http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team

Re: [Debconf-team] website presence meeting: crunch time.

[martin f krafft]

also sprach Bernelle Verster  [2015-10-04 20:54 +0200]:
> Said another way, if we do the *amazing*, and wafer is the way to
> go, are we confident that it will carry us all the way through, or
> do we still need to see it's stuff by the deadline to find out
> what else needs to be planned for? Can we say, yes, we are 100%
> behind wafer, and we need to know what its limitations are by the
> deadline (e.g. 31 October) so we can fix those things in time?

Summary from IRC (I hope I got it all right):

There are people in dc-orga with a lot of experience as to what's
needed from a website/registration/schedule system.

There are people who know wafer and can make informed guesstimates
about what it would take to add certain features.

The intersection of these two groups can answer the question and fix
the decision, and by the multiple-eyes principle, it would help to
have a few people in that intersection.

One way forward would thus be to demonstrate wafer to people with
dc-orga experience relating to the registration system, let them
formulate questions and then write up a plan of

  - what can already be done
  - what needs to be implemented
  - and how one would implement each feature, along with
a conservative time estimate.

The goal of all of this is not to keep people busy. Rather, it's
about expediting the decision for wafer, so that we can comfortably
make it.

For if wafer wouldn't meet our needs, then we'd need to revert to
Summit, and we'd need to put a lot of work into Summit, so we
shouldn't wait too long.

On the other hand, if we know what needs to be done, and there's
already a general direction of how it would be done with wafer,
along with a time estimation, then people might just pick it up the
work.

-- 
 .''`.   martin f. krafft  @martinkrafft
: :'  :  DebConf orga team
`. `'`
  `-  DebConf16: Cape Town: https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf16
  DebConf17 in your country? https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf17


digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)
___
Debconf-team mailing list
Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org
http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team

Re: [Debconf-team] website presence meeting: crunch time.

[martin f krafft]

also sprach Bernelle Verster  [2015-10-04 19:49 +0200]:
> Decide on which system(s) are being developed as contenders for the
> DC16 website. (If we feel we can decide to only go with wafer, that
> would be *amazing*)

I would be happy if wafer was the system we need and which does
everything for us. I'd be quite happy to retire my Odoo plans for
now. I will be using Odoo for another conference in May 2016 and
then will have a lot more info.

Maybe the best next step would be to get a wafer tour, e.g.
a screencast or an IRC tutorial, showing off the functionality, so
that we can convince everyone that it's the most promising solution
and worthy of investing time?

-- 
 .''`.   martin f. krafft  @martinkrafft
: :'  :  DebConf orga team
`. `'`
  `-  DebConf16: Cape Town: https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf16
  DebConf17 in your country? https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf17


digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)
___
Debconf-team mailing list
Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org
http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team

Re: [Debconf-team] website presence meeting: crunch time.

[Bernelle Verster]

On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 8:28 PM, martin f krafft  wrote:
> also sprach Bernelle Verster  [2015-10-04 19:49 +0200]:
>> Decide on which system(s) are being developed as contenders for the
>> DC16 website. (If we feel we can decide to only go with wafer, that
>> would be *amazing*)
>
> I would be happy if wafer was the system we need and which does
> everything for us. I'd be quite happy to retire my Odoo plans for
> now. I will be using Odoo for another conference in May 2016 and
> then will have a lot more info.
>
> Maybe the best next step would be to get a wafer tour, e.g.
> a screencast or an IRC tutorial, showing off the functionality, so
> that we can convince everyone that it's the most promising solution
> and worthy of investing time?
>
So I think that will happen anyways, wafer is one of the 'contenders'.
I guess to rephrase, are there any other serious contenders?
And if not, and we are *not* convinced by wafer by the deadline
(albeit unlikely), what then? Summit?

Said another way, if we do the *amazing*, and wafer is the way to go,
are we confident that it will carry us all the way through, or do we
still need to see it's stuff by the deadline to find out what else
needs to be planned for? Can we say, yes, we are 100% behind wafer,
and we need to know what its limitations are by the deadline (e.g. 31
October) so we can fix those things in time?

> --
>  .''`.   martin f. krafft  @martinkrafft
> : :'  :  DebConf orga team
> `. `'`
>   `-  DebConf16: Cape Town: https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf16
>   DebConf17 in your country? https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf17
>
> ___
> Debconf-team mailing list
> Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org
> http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
>
___
Debconf-team mailing list
Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org
http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team

Re: [Debconf-team] website presence meeting: crunch time.

[Eric Dantan Rzewnicki]

On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 07:49:06PM +0200, Bernelle Verster wrote:
> Hi all
> May I suggest Wednesday 18:00 UTC just because I see no other
> alternative. Please feel free to suggest another day/time.
> 
> * Can we get an idea for what is in the running, and who is driving it?
> Systems intended to show convincing argument by deadline, and lead
> person driving it:
> wafer (hodgestar)
> odoo? (madduck?)
> (edrz?)

I'm not driving anything. 

> (Modify as appropriate on the titanpad, not in the email thread)

Done.

> * Then I put the advantages and disadvantages for each 'contender'.
> The way this is written feels very battle-like, which is not (really)
> intended. If you have another way of summarising this, please go ahead
> (a table in a wiki?) The point is that at the meeting I don't want to
> go through all of this, it should be clear by then.

Wafer seems to have the momentum, so its ok with me if we skip the
battle and just figure out who's going to do what to make wafer work for
DC16 (and beyond).

-Eric
___
Debconf-team mailing list
Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org
http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team