[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [E-devel] website maintainers needed
Michael Jennings wrote:
> On Monday, 11 September 2006, at 15:27:11 (-0400),
> Christopher Michael wrote:
>> KX, ahh I see. I was unaware of the reasons that get-e started, but
all that aside, Perhaps I should have rephrased my statement then:
>> "It's not that I refuse to contribute" :)
> As one of the few people actually writing docs these days, your
> opinion is of particular importance to me (and, IMHO, to this
> So why, other than the maintainer issue, haven't your docs been
> contributed to E.org? Is the maintainer issue the only one?
The maintaner bit, afaik and imho, is the only issue. I have 95% of the
new user guide ready to go. I'm waiting for E to settle a little bit,
then I can complete the new guide with updated screenshots, etc, etc.
Upon it's completion, who do I send it to? I know/hear that benr has
been doing some occasional updates to e.org (at least in the past), but
something like a user guide has to be kept up-to-date with cvs changes
and such, so do I send him a new copy every day? Doubtful and a possible
PITA for both he and I. The only viable solutions, imho, for this case
would be to have either an active system where you can live update
(xsm), or doing updates via cvs.
Granted a wiki would be nice for users where they could update articles,
add things, make corrections, etc, etc to help each other out but that
gets into having someone to watch/check/verify submissions for accuracy.
> For me personally, what stops me from messing with E.org is Rectang.
> Not XSM, necessarily...just the fact that I'm having to go through a
> company's "portal server" to edit independent project content on a
> separate server. (I also object to the coup-like fashion in which it
> appeared, but that's ancient history.)
Personally, I don't mind using XSM at all. I find it very easy to use
and has a nice interface. Granted, it does have some minor annoyances
but once you get past them, it's rather nice.
As far as editing e.org, I'd certainly help with the process. I think
that a major part of it NOT getting updated currently, imho, is the
whole sf.net issue(s). Like you said, going through a companies "portal
server" to edit independent project content is cumbersome sometimes.
If/when that donated server gets up and running with possibly the e site
on it, then perhaps we could use an CMS without going through a portal.
What ever the outcome of this decision is I'll be here :)
"Can't we all get along?" :)