On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 09:58:02PM +0100, Martin Aspeli wrote:
> Lennart Regebro wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 11:37 AM, Christophe Combelles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>> So let's just build a first nice zope.org with subfolders explaining the
>>> different projects because it's importan
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 10:57 PM, Martin Aspeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In the cases where projects (like Zope 3, Zope 2, CMF and ZODB) don't have
> their own sites, we give them space to maintain some documentation and basic
> information.
That story is better than the original formulation.
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 11:37 AM, Christophe Combelles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
So let's just build a first nice zope.org with subfolders explaining the
different projects because it's important to have just *something*. At
least.
Sure, that's fine. But that's just o
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 11:22 AM, Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I disagree. Very much. Note that we are not forcing everyone to use this
new site; it is perfectly possible for projects to setup their own site.
And in that case we end up with two sites, on
Maerteijn wrote:
I'm thinking about volunteering for the zope2 section, but I already can say
that I'm not an expert on all facets of zope2. However, helping out is the
main concern now so something is better than nothing.
Absolutely. I don't think you need to be an expert to do a good job. In
Chris Withers wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
[snip]
A few frills here and there are permitted, of course.
Actually, no frills please. They just come back to bite us every damned
time. It looks like we're gonna get lumbered with Plone again but can we
please please please make sure it's stabl
Chris Withers wrote:
Martin Aspeli wrote:
Yes. That's the point. It's vanilla Plone (well, one custom content type
for the "feature" that fronts each section, but it's trivial) with a
simple skin, not the FrankePlone that runs the old site. As a case in
point, Wichert upgraded it from 3.0 to 3
Previously Chris Withers wrote:
> Martin Aspeli wrote:
> >
> >Yes. That's the point. It's vanilla Plone (well, one custom content type
> >for the "feature" that fronts each section, but it's trivial) with a
> >simple skin, not the FrankePlone that runs the old site. As a case in
> >point, Wicher
Martin Aspeli wrote:
Yes. That's the point. It's vanilla Plone (well, one custom content type
for the "feature" that fronts each section, but it's trivial) with a
simple skin, not the FrankePlone that runs the old site. As a case in
point, Wichert upgraded it from 3.0 to 3.1rc in about ten mi
Previously Martin Aspeli wrote:
> Chris Withers wrote:
> >Martijn Faassen wrote:
> >>Yeah, I know this is really a "me too" post, but I think we should err
> >>on the side of conventional for our website. We can't go from
> >>out-of-date boring to cutting edge hip in one giant leap; it won't be
Chris Withers wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Yeah, I know this is really a "me too" post, but I think we should err
on the side of conventional for our website. We can't go from
out-of-date boring to cutting edge hip in one giant leap; it won't be
believable. Let's stick with what people know f
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Yeah, I know this is really a "me too" post, but I think we should err
on the side of conventional for our website. We can't go from
out-of-date boring to cutting edge hip in one giant leap; it won't be
believable. Let's stick with what people know from other sites, and
Hi there,
Alexander Limi wrote:
[snip]
- Try not to be too clever with the "Taste"/"Get" and other links.
People actually scan for links that are similar from other projects, and
having to interpret/understand them is confusing. I would definitely
switch "Taste" to "Examples", and possibly "Ge
On Apr 7, 2008, at 00:20 , Alexander Limi wrote:
- Try not to be too clever with the "Taste"/"Get" and other links.
People actually scan for links that are similar from other projects,
and having to interpret/understand them is confusing.
+1
- The list of companies using Zope includes sev
Alexander Limi wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 08:52:07 -0700, Martin Aspeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Now we need people to help contribute content, review the content that's
already there and tie up a few loose ends.
You can see current state of play here: http://zode01.lovelysystems.com.
Aw
On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 08:52:07 -0700, Martin Aspeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Now we need people to help contribute content, review the content that's
already there and tie up a few loose ends.
You can see current state of play here: http://zode01.lovelysystems.com.
Awesome! It looks great,
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Kent Tenney wrote:
Look at Sphinx for providing brilliant access to ReST doc.
http://sphinx.pocoo.org/
I think looking at Sphinx is definitely a worthwhile effort. That said,
I agree with Martin that we shouldn't let the new website effort be held
up by (or distracted
Kent Tenney wrote:
Look at Sphinx for providing brilliant access to ReST doc.
http://sphinx.pocoo.org/
I think looking at Sphinx is definitely a worthwhile effort. That said,
I agree with Martin that we shouldn't let the new website effort be held
up by (or distracted by) technological fixes.
Look at Sphinx for providing brilliant access to ReST doc.
http://sphinx.pocoo.org/
doing no more than adding a
.. module::
directive to a ReST file causes it to be converted to html, latex or pdf
indexed and searchable.
placing
in the
.. toctree::
directive creates the proper links to the modu
Paul Carduner wrote:
On Apr 5, 2008, at 12:11 PM, Martin Aspeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There's no content that isn't visible to anonymous on the site.
Basically, we originally thought we would have one
documentation/"learn" section for all Zope technologies. However, it
seemed to make m
On Apr 5, 2008, at 12:11 PM, Martin Aspeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There's no content that isn't visible to anonymous on the site.
Basically, we originally thought we would have one
documentation/"learn" section for all Zope technologies. However, it
seemed to make more sense to have a f
Paul Carduner wrote:
On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 10:54 AM, Martin Aspeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Paul Carduner wrote:
I'm wondering where the "Documentation" section is? I'd like to
volunteer for *that* section. By the way, the design looks pretty
nice.
There's one (called "Learn") for eac
On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 10:54 AM, Martin Aspeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Paul Carduner wrote:
>
>
> > I'm wondering where the "Documentation" section is? I'd like to
> > volunteer for *that* section. By the way, the design looks pretty
> > nice.
> >
>
> There's one (called "Learn") for each p
Paul Carduner wrote:
I'm wondering where the "Documentation" section is? I'd like to
volunteer for *that* section. By the way, the design looks pretty
nice.
There's one (called "Learn") for each project, i.e. zope 2, zope 3, cmf,
zodb.
Which one would you like to contribute to?
Martin
-
24 matches
Mail list logo
