[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [E-devel] Website Heated Discussions



On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 09:11:19PM +0100, Andrew Williams wrote:
> Not wanting to start a flamewar myself with this email but I wonder why
> it is that the Enlightenment crowd seem to be unable to hold meaningful
> discussions when it comes to policy decisions like this?
> Why not take a leaf from other, more successful (happier??) communities
> and try:
> 
> 1) identify what is wrong

The wesbsite is horribly out of date. For whatever reason no one has
stepped up to contribute.

> 2) propose a list of possibilities that could solve the problem

A) Stick with XSM. Make the process of gaining editor access to e.org more transparent. Who currently has it? Who can grant it? 

B) Move to a different CMS.

C) Move to a simple 'mostly static' site, with small snippets of php /
<insert language here> for dynamic content (like auto-generated lists of
releases, etc).

There are several different types of 'content' we want on an e website. 

I) News updates 
II) Themes/Icons/etc.
III) Documentation
IV) EFL App pages

(I) is served well by a CMS like interface (text box in a web form).
(II) is better served (imo) by a set of forms for uploading / updating
themes / icons. that way themers could control when their new theme gets
released without requiring maintainer intervention.
(III) Static pages + wiki
(IV) Static pages

Anyway, those are my opinions.

How does XSM store the page content internally? It seems like many
people dislike editing files in a text box. Is there any way it could
use files on the fs? Then just have a cmd line script to compile the
site?

rephorm

> 3) open discussions / votes for a set period of time
> 4) collate and announce
> 
> Surely this kind of scheme will result in a concensus (assuming of
> course that those involved are those that comment / vote).
> 
> Just my 2p worth due to recent work in other communities.
> 
> HandyAndE
>