On Tue, 2009-04-21 at 09:42 -0500, Paul Cutler wrote: [snip] > Murray said at the beginning of this month in his email update > regarding the wgo redesign > (http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-web-list/2009-April/msg00002.html): > > "There are still people working on a Plone site, though there hasn't > been much activity recently. I don't believe they will succeed, > because this has failed so often, but nobody should stop them from > trying as long as we don't have something else." (Murray also > mentions that a large part of the work has been done as well). > > Vincent later in the email thread added some comments, including > "plone is not the best choice for GNOME because we have nobody active > who will be able to take care of it." though he did go on to add he > didn't want to have a discussion of what CMS we should use without a > concrete plan to address it.
I found that to be a strange response to me saying (in that same email) that we should not block on choosing _any_ CMS. We don't need a CMS to get the new structure and content online. A suitable CMS would be _nice_, but it's not a blocker. Lack of committed web people is the blocker. I mean, people do regular HTML/SSI/CSS, or maybe something extra that's simple. I'm not the guy to decide that (and I have zero time now), but I know it shouldn't need a whole CMS to just get second-level navigation. By focusing again on a choice of CMS we would just be putting a new obstacle in our way. We failed to do a simple job. We should accept that and try to get it done instead of pretending that we failed because it was complicated. -- [email protected] www.murrayc.com www.openismus.com _______________________________________________ gnome-web-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-web-list
