Re: www.gnome.org redesign status

[Luis Villa <luis tieguy org>]

On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Murray Cumming <murrayc murrayc com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-04-21 at 10:56 -0400, Luis Villa wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Paul Cutler
>> <pcutler foresightlinux org> wrote:
>> > I'd like to propose that we follow up on Vincent's comments and form a
>> > small team to investigate if any other solutions might be a better
>> > fit.  It's possible in the last 2 1/2 years the technology and the
>> > members in the community might have changed enough that we might want
>> > to think about choosing a new CMS, based on the original requirements
>> > at http://live.gnome.org/GnomeWeb/CmsRequirements.  My first instinct
>> > would be to evaluate Plone, Midgard (as it came in #2 last time ) and
>> > Drupal (as it seems to have grown greatly in its use over the last
>> > couple of years, and the major reason it wasn't chosen was i18n which
>> > may have changed in this time).
>>
>> This may qualify as bikeshedding but I'd also suggest looking at
>> elgg.org (a GPL-licensed social networking platform). It isn't a
>> traditional CMS by any stretch, so might be quickly dismissable as not
>> meeting most of the requirements, but it might be worth rethinking
>> what gnome.org would look like if it were primarily a tool for a gnome
>> *community*.
>
> I think it's clear that feature creep won't help get this (should be)
> simple job done.

I assume that it is not actually a simple job, since it has now taken
seven years and ground down the spirits and motivation of several very
good people in the process. So I thought maybe taking a different
approach to the problem (or at least thinking about it from a
different perspective) might be useful. If it is in fact a simple job,
and something else is preventing it from happening, then by all means
ignore the suggestion- you know I'm the first one to say 'simplify,
simplify, simplify' when it is appropriate.

Luis