Re: projects.gnome.org versus live.gnome.org
- From: Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs igalia com>
- To: Dave Neary <dneary gnome org>
- Cc: marketing-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: projects.gnome.org versus live.gnome.org
- Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 10:47:44 +0100
Hey Dave, all.
On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 09:45:03 +0100, Dave Neary <dneary gnome org>
On 11/24/2011 06:18 PM, Joanmarie Diggs wrote:
Periodically I wonder about projects.gnome.org versus
Some modules and groups use one, some use the other, others use
I'm currently in the process of cleaning up the Orca wiki (and
did the same for the Accessibility Team wiki), I figured I'd wonder
aloud this time: Are there any plans, expectations, etc. regarding
versus the other?
projects.g.o is a set of web-pages where you control everything that
flexibility, if you want to do some layout that's hard in the GNOME
wiki. The wiki is an easy lo-fi way for a project to have a web
presence, but because anyone can change pages, it's sometimes harder
to maintain (you might want to look at MoinMoin ACLs as a way to
who can change your project's wiki page).
A projects page is stored in Git, and deployed directly on commit
with a post-commit hook. So editors need access to Git, and need to
comfortable editing web pages. The wiki lowers the barrier to editing
the web page, but, well, it's a wiki...
Yeah, I've been using both p.g.o and l.g.o for Accessibility and Orca.
I'll definitely check out MoinMoin ACLs. Thank for that tip!
But really what I was wondering is: Are projects encouraged to do
"whatever floats their boat" with respect to these tools? For instance,
on a couple of different occasions I've made casual reference to
projects.gnome.org and had someone comment "I thought p.g.o. was
'deprecated'." And then there's this (out of date, but still hanging
around) page: https://live.gnome.org/GnomeGoals/WikiMigration.
] [Thread Prev