Re: The future of gup in developer and bugzilla

[John Williams <john williams lists gmail com>]

On Thu, 2006-02-09 at 11:11 +0100, Claus Schwarm wrote:
> > En/na Shaun McCance ha escrit:
> > 
> > > 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?
> > 
> > I agree with this distinction between "public-facing stuff" and
> > "internal planning and sketching".
> > 
> 
> The argument is false:

Then Claus goes on to explain that the problems that Shaun sees could be
fixed.

I happen to agree with Shaun however, if by "public facing" we mean "for
consumption by people who have no interest in getting involved in the
GNOME community".  Not beyond using GNOME and related applications, I
mean.  The reason is simple: if we want to look organised and
professional, so that we are a reasonable alternative DE/OS offerings,
l.g.o. is never going to convey that. (And nor should it, that's not
what it's for!)

The only problem is developer.gnome.org or maybe library.gnome.org: I
think they should be living sites, and hence on some kind of wiki.  But
I am not a developer, so my opinions should be down-weighted ;-)

cheers,

John