On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 18:31 +0000, Calum Benson wrote: > On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 18:44 +0100, Quim Gil wrote: > > > > En/na Calum Benson ha escrit: > > > Can you summarise the discussion again? :/ > > > > The part that affects GUP starts more or less here: > > http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-web-list/2005-December/msg00092.html > > > > The debate moves around the platform to be used to manage wgo: to CVS > > like until now or to CMS with Drupal (as default candidate). See > > http://live.gnome.org/GnomeWeb_2fPlatform > > > > By default developer.g.o would move to live.g.o as agreed, but > > apparently this is not enough for GUP's requirements. In the meantime > > Shaun said that perhaps we need something more "strcutured" than a wiki > > to organise and create stable documentation. Drupal has this capacity > > and even some functionality to export Docbook, but of course it can't > > generate tarballs etc.
For the record, I'm pretty much completely opposed to relying on live.gnome.org for any real public-facing stuff. For internal planning and sketching, fine. But it's a wasteland of broken navigation. Why should half our site look and feel different than the rest? Get a single CMS in place and put everything you can under it, including all the current developer.gnome.org content. With a good CMS, we have all the advantages of a wiki anyway, and the site will feel unified. > Hmm yes, true enough. Have to admit I'd personally be quite happy to > move away from DocBook (perhaps just to plain old HTML) for the HIG > anyway, as it's kind of hard to take stylistic advice very seriously > from a document that looks a bit crap :) But of course, we lose the > ability to easily generate PDFs from plain HTML. (I have similar > reservations about using anything vaguely wiki based for such large > documents-- I've yet to see any done well.) It's only crap output because the XSLT you're using produces crap output. There's nothing inherent about DocBook that makes the output crap. > > So we should decide what to do with GUP, considering that developer.g.o > > will be closed at some point. > > Whatever happened to the whole library.gnome.org concept, btw? That's > conceivably the sort of place where stable versions of the HIG et al. > should live, with (perhaps) development versions taking shape on > live.gnome.org (ideally with some sort of magic wiki->DocBook > translation happening at the appropriate time...) library.gnome.org really needs to happen. We need a strapping young lad (or lass) to come and take charge, like Quim has done so well with the rest of the web space. -- Shaun _______________________________________________ Usability mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/usability
