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

Re: [E-devel] Continuing the website saga

On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 16:59 -0700, Ben Rockwood wrote:
> Michael, chill.  Lets look at the facts shall we:
> 1) Since moving to XSM updates have almost complete stopped.  The
> changes in the last 2 years are all trivial.  (Minus the redesign work.)

This has nothing to do with XSM as far as I can see - get-e.org uses XSM
and has lots of updates and folk working on it.

> 2) XSM is, speaking only for myself, slow and non-intuitive to work
> with.  Simple news updates take 30 minutes or more due to rebuilds.

This is not XSM, but the fact that every single file is uploading over
SSH to sf.net which is very very slow. This can be improved, however, by
using a better delta on news items. A page with a large archive is not
being intelligently uploaded and what does need to be uploaded could be
backgrounded so you get the immediate response on the UI that folk

> 3) No one has stepped up to the plate to work within the current
> framework, and honestly I haven't heard anyone say they like it or are
> willing to maintain it in XSM.

erm - have you been reading this thread (or the last one, I forget)
there _are_ people that like XSM, OK they may not be in the majority but
there are enough to prove that it is not useless.

> 4) Final decisions on what happens with E.org is Raster's call.  I
> haven't just yanked down XSM and done things "my way" because its not my
> call, its ultimately his.  I brought up discussion about switching off
> of XSM over a year ago and the discussion fizzled out on the "leave it
> alone" note, I didn't rock the boat.

Whilst that is good of you it does seem to emphasise the whole "my way
or the highway" that michael pointed out before.

> 5) I don't care WHAT we use.  Flat HTML is fast and easy and we'd have
> an updated site in less than a day even with the site on SF.  So long as
> the choice is easier and faster to work with I really am not going to
> press for any particular solution.

Cool - when E gets it's own server XSM will speed up around 50 fold if
not more - have you even tried the demo set up at
http://rectang.com/Software/XSM/Demo/ ? that shows how fast it can run
when publishing locally.

> Bottom line, the site gets a noteworthy amount of traffic on a daily
> basis.  No one is updating or maintaining the site.  This wasn't the
> case prior to XSM, I'm not saying it was perfect but work was at least
> happening.  Tell me what you want to move to and I'll do it.  The point
> is here that I'm willing and able to do the work.  Tell me what you want
> and that no one will freak out when I do it and off we go. 

The reason there are no edits with XSM and there were before seems to be
simply that it was only you that made edits, so if you will not use XSM
then there will be no edits, seems pretty clear to me.

> ... besides, Michael, you know me.  I don't tend to lone-gun things or
> dictate.  I'm here to help, others will help, I believe, if we have a
> better framework, lets just get the site working reasonably again.  
> I've had "Fix E.org" on my TODO list for over 2 years!!!  I'd like to
> finally get on with things.

Using your preferred method "fixing" would require giving CVS write
access (and a CVS tutorial for the non-coders) to every person who
asked. Seems to me like a non-solution.

> benr.