Re: Alternative plan for DDP
On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 10:51:19AM +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 10:46:21PM +0100, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > Hi,
> > Let me propose following alternative plan.
> As far as I see it it's not really an "alternative" plan, that's just step
> 4 of the plan I proposed fully detailed. I don't think we should skip steps
> 1-3 and
> a) not forewarn authors and translators
> b) not maintain website updates while we implement the technical details
> c) not wait until what debian-admins have to say regarding this website
> update proposal, which drastically changes the way website is updated and
> has an impact beyond just the DDP.
I partially agree. Please, we should wait a word from d-admin as first step.
People with ssh access to cvs should be currently
sufficiently warned about. We waited two months, a few days of dalay are
not a so big problem. I cannot see a real reason to have the old cvs
working instead. Anyone with a ssh access can get a snapshot in any
moment, and other contributors should anyway avoid committing.
They also could wait a few days for transition.
> I might be overly cautious here, and I do know this discussion should
> have taken place two months ago. But I sincerely prefer to err on the side
> of caution than to have people wondering what's going on.
> Notice that if someone casually browses Alioth's CVS he will now see:
> where not even a README file says that CVS should _not_ be used!
> I'm adding a news item now telling people that's just up for testing, but
> it should not have been done in the first place.
Well done. The project home page should be more clear about
the transition status. Something like '<h1>stay tuned, but please do not
commit cvs changes on alioth or cvs.d.o even if possible, wihout asking
on debian-doc</h1>' could be ideal.
There is also a News section for that.
Francesco P. Lovergine