On 2/20/07, Mirjam Wäckerlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > I'd like to start a discussion about the use of gobby for the UWN. I > see that working with gobby has some advantages, though I see some > problems, too. Personally, I'd prefer that the uwn stays on the wiki > only, because > > * Some people can't access gobby at all due to port restriction of > their internet account (myself I've been having this problem lately) > > * Porting the UWN to gobby means that people have to install the > application and also to learn to use it. This complicates the > participation and may be a barrier especially for new users (e.g. who > just learned how to use a wiki). I think that keeping the process of > UWN as simple as possible would be the better solution. > > * Kubuntu users have to install a lot of gnome-libraries if they want > to contribute (this is not to start a flame about kde vs. gnome, > personally I have installed gobby, but I know from others that they > don't want to use it due to that reason). > > What do you think about it? Are there more advantages than the > problems I listed and would you like to keep gobby? And if yes, do you > have proposals to eliminate those problems? > > Regards, > > Mirjam
Mirjam, I would love to stop using gobby but we need a real time collaborative editor, If moin and/or mediawiki get one of thus, I will enthusiastically use it, but until then, the requirement for using gobby stays. However, gobby should only be used during sprints and not kept for long periods of time. Cheers, Corey -- ubuntu-marketing mailing list ubuntu-marketing@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-marketing
