Alan Burlison wrote: > Simon Phipps wrote: > > >> The proposal below looks good to me, especially since it also answers >> Roy's very reasonable issues with the proposed OGB Committee. I suggest >> the Content project also be endorsed by Advocacy since there is a clear >> functional relationship. >> > > Mike Kupfer wrote: > > >> Would it work to have a Content project that is overseen by multiple >> Community Groups? >> > > Which seems eminently sensible to me. Perhaps the initial Project > membership should be drawn from members of bot the existing Website > Project and the Advocacy Community Group? > > JimG also pointed out to me that the Documentation CG already has a > Content project [1], so there is a name clash if not also a scope clash. > The main aim of the existing Content project seems to be to produce > content for both 'external' articles and the website. I'm not sure that > this is the same as my proposed Content project - the existing Content > project seems focused on providing material, my proposed project is more > to do with the management of any such content. Perhaps I should rename > my proposed "Content" project to "Editorial"? > > [1] http://opensolaris.org/os/project/content/ > > Hi Alan,
We can certainly use the existing content project to fill this need, I think it is quite appropriate. I can chirp about it on-list to see what others think, but I do think the group would be happy to take on this new, but familiar, territory. Regards, Michelle Olson OpenSolaris Documentation Community
