On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 06:09:41PM +0100, Ana Guerrero wrote:
> > From here, I believe that a plan to go ahead might be as follows:
> >
> > - set up the blog engine instance that will be used for blog.d.o
> > - configure, tune, etc.
> > - register blog.debian.net and make it point to it
> > - set up redirects from the other blog-ish resources we have (times.d.n,
> > news.d.n, what else?) so that subscribers to their feeds get pointed
> > to blog.d.n
> > - add blog.d.n to planet
> > - announce!, including suggested work-flow for contributed blog posts
> I am a bit confused for this, it is pretty much what is already just
> changing the name from news to blog and updating the workflow to encourage
> DDs contributing news posts. Do I understand correctly?
I was in fact assuming a start from scratch, but if you can simply
re-target something already existing, sure, why not. However, I duly
note that I do expect times.d.n to be merged into blog.d.{n,o} as
merging all existing blog-ish resources was one of the point.
> I am OK with the name change from news.d.n to blog.d.o to make it official,
> but I do not see the advantange of switching from news.d.n to blog.d.n.
> (Actually, blog.d.o|n make it looks like a blog service for DDs that is
> very different of our goal)
Here, my assumption was that we didn't want to lose readers of either
news.d.n and times.d.n (the latter maybe a bit less so, since AFAICT it
has been down for a while) in the switch. That's why I was thinking as
redirects. If we don't consider the goal worthwhile, we might ignore it,
although we should communicate clearly that future blog-ish stuff in
Debian will be published through blog.d.n.
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Quando anche i santi ti voltano le spalle, | . |. I've fans everywhere
ti resta John Fante -- V. Capossela .......| ..: |.......... -- C. Adams
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature