[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-www
Subject:    Re: [kde-promo] KDE4. www4?
From:       Luke Parry <lparry () pazmonster ! com>
Date:       2008-03-18 17:45:07
Message-ID: 200803181745.07688.lparry () pazmonster ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Tuesday 18 March 2008 10:35:50 you wrote:
> Alle lunedì 17 marzo 2008, Luke Parry ha scritto:
> > Another possibility is the fear that no-one would to develop something
> > that may not be used at all, as for instance, a week or two ago, there
> > was talk about a CMS, but soon talk of which died away. If we don't know
> > what we are developing for, why should we waste time on it...
>
> In the nowadays age complex websites has to be managed by CMS. kde.org is
> not managed by CMS, but with patches via SVN and if a KDE websites wants
> help you cannot use SVN because you need to know HTML and PHP (not a big
> problem nowadays, but not always people want to learn it), or simply you
> cannot use a sets of PHP pages without a simple way to add things like you
> do in a CMS. 

Yeah, I believe that aswell, but I just don't understand what's stopping 
people from changing over. It doesn't have to be a hastely transition between 
the new site and the old, it could take a couple of months, if necessary so 
that it works without flaws.

It would make development more tidier,and easier, as using a cms, often they 
are modular, so one developor could work on say a rss aggregator (use someone 
elses module) and then an authorised user could upload this or request the 
sysadmins to do so...

Also most cms's can be setup pretty easy, and often on their own sites they 
have tutorials, so it is more easier for people to get involved, and they 
won't have to worry about developing on a custom framework, that they may 
potentially mess up...

> Italian websites uses e107 also if it's not perfect, but it 
> has the features Italian team needs. We used Joomla for a year but it
> didn't feet exactly our needs. Also e107 has some limits too but some
> things are done better than Joomla... Anyway a CMS is needed. The problem
> is that to switch from a CMS to another you have to reinsert all articles
> and news bacause the databases are not compatible and you have not an
> import/export function.
>

Choosing a cms, well, gnome use plome, but being honest drupal serves well on 
past experience. But this is what they checked for each cms at the time of 
their decision.

http://live.gnome.org/GnomeWeb/CmsRequirements
> > I don't know if my message gets across each time, but some organisation
> > and plan is needed, as it is just a recurring cycle.
>
> I also think so. I know that people try to do their best to follow a lot of
> things in KDE and I don't blame them, but a better organisation can just be
> better, also if I have no time to be part of the organization. :(
>

Yeah sadly it is true, where I've also experienced work that just didn't make 
the cut, due to organisation.
> Giovanni Venturi

One argument that I picked up from another thread was that there is no way 
to 'play the blame game' if someone screws up the site. Proper organisation 
of who has access to the file system, database, and admin credentials would 
prevent this.

What would need to do, is get a specification to what the site needs, one 
argument about a cms, is that it performance will struggle, but finding out 
the problems and solutions would be helpful.

I also forgot about data migration - most of the data on *some sites is 
outdated anyway and some don't really require any at all. Also it was 
previously said that much of this information is poorly laid out, and the 
usability of kde site as a whole is terrible. Getting a usability expert 
would be nice ;)

I might speak to Aaron Seigo, the sysadmins, and see what they say, as we 
talk, but the ball never rolls.

Thanks Luke
_______________________________________________
kde-www mailing list
kde-www@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-www

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]