Re: GNOME Webhackers

[Paul Cooper <pgc ucecom com>]

On Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 02:30:46PM +0100, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> > * please tell people which cvs module to abuse - in fact tell me - is it 
> > web-devel-2 or gnomeweb-wml
> 
> web-devel-2 is the current d.g.o
> 
> gnomeweb-wml is the current w.g.o

does this mean that w.g.o. content is marked up in some subset of wml and 
post processed? Are people generally happy with this? Should we base our 
xslt on this as content markup? From what I've seen d.g.o works 
differently?

> > * longer term we need to have a todo list so that folks can just pick up 
> > and go with stuff. (maybe the next point will help ;-)
> 
> Heh, yeah. :D
> 
> So, are you talking about d.g.o or w.g.o? I was hoping to have some time
> alone with d.g.o. ;) [ sound of knives sharpening in the background ]

Well in the structure proposals so far d.g.o. is a section of w.g.o - I 
mean it will have the same or similar styling no? The whole thing should 
have a cohesive look and feel, including lesser known cvs.gnome.org and 
mail.gnome.org.

> d.g.o is already sane in terms of structure. I think we'd be futzing with it
> minimally to begin with - just moving some less relevant top-level stuff
> down, and pulling important stuff up. The migration won't be too hard, as
> the html files are currently just the content anyway, so we can encapsulate
> them in a new system fairly easily.

Seems we have a least one prong of our site structure sorted then - it's 
just the rest we get to argue about ;)

> w.g.o will be harder, as it sounds like we'll be tackling the structure
> differently to the current site. We can still grab a lot from the site's
> content.

But here I feel less like I'm messing with other peoples active content
than the stuff on d.g.o. - if you know what I mean.

> In terms of development process and CVS, I'm tempted to say 'build it
> outside GNOME CVS, then throw it in on top of the current module, having
> atticed everything else'. I don't think that's the right way of doing it
> though. We should create a new branch, and do all of our development there.

CVS please! One of the difficulties I've had is getting up to speed is the 
spread out nature of the development. I'm no cvs guru but even I find it 
easier to cvs update than check 3-4 websites for changes, etc. At least if 
a couple of people have cvs ci permission I can send patches to the list. 
Also it is another place to put the structure proposals, todo list, 
changelog, etc. Plus we might get a mention in the cvs section of the 
gnome summary ;O

Paul