[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Discussion: updating events page?

[slightly reformatted]
begin  quotation  from Luca Capello (in <[🔎] sa761yigfo9.fsf@gismo.pca.it>):
> On Fri, 10 May 2013 11:50:40 +0200, Arne Wichmann wrote:
> > begin  quotation  from Luca Capello (in <[🔎] sa74necber2.fsf@gismo.pca.it>):
> >> On Wed, 08 May 2013 11:15:00 +0200, Arne Wichmann wrote:
> >> > - We replace the events page with a link to a wiki page (I would be
> >> >   willing to set up and sporadically maintain the wiki page).
> >> 
> >> As from previous discussions, IMHO the Events page is something
> >> different than a wiki page: the former has .ics entries, it is a
> >> almost-static page and to me it some more official than any other *.d.o
> >> domain.
> >
> > I am quite aware of this. .ics might be created from a wiki page, too -
> > even though I am not sre how at tha moment.
> >
> > Moreover a static page for dynamic content is not a good idea in my eyes.
> I do not see the Events pages as 'dynamic content': you organize
> something, you announce it and it is added to those pages.  For
> everything which is dynamic, there is the wiki, which is usually linked
> From the Events page:

Well, events pop up at some point in time and are over at another. Thist is
dynamic in my eyes, even though it does not happen very fast. The point
here is that the change is faster than our willingness to adapt the web
page to it.

> >> > - We drop the events page.
> >> >
> >> > Alternative options are of course welcome. An unupdated events page does
> >> > more harm than good.
> >> 
> >> I do not agree, it simply means that there is a problem.  The fact that
> >> the Debian life goes on with events (being there on debian-events-*@
> >> or other lists or wiki) means that this problem is not so critical.
> >
> > So we disagree. To elaborate: unupdates pages (especially event/news or
> > similar) at least to me create the impression that nothing is happening in
> > a community. If a page is not there or even better links somewhere with less
> > official but at least halfway current information this impression will not
> > be created.
> Again: I do not consider *any* wiki, not event wiki.d.o, "official
> material", but as I wrote in my first reply I am perfectly aware that
> this is a quite different opinion in today's world.

Then no events page would be a better solution.

> > So, your option would be to leave the situation as it is? Or what is your
> > proposal?
> I do not have any proposal and any improvement will be fine: I have
> simply stated my opinion, at least to continue the discussion.

Ok, an opinion it is. But given your voice change will not be possible at
the moment as I do not see a consensus emerging. And the status quo is not
acceptable to me.


[...] If you don't want to be restricted, don't agree to it. If you are
coerced, comply as much as you must to protect yourself, just don't support
it. Noone can free you but yourself. (crag, on Debian Planet)
Arne Wichmann (aw@linux.de)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: