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

Re: D-W web site part of the general Debian WWW infrastructure? (was: Re: translation to French)

On 06/03/2005 at 15:11 Erinn Clark wrote...


> > IMHO, the d-w project has now reached a sufficiently mature activity
> > for being part of the "official" web site. Of course, this is only my
> > personal opinion and further discussion is required, especially with
> > the web site team members.
> I agree that it's sufficiently mature, but I think we may potentially lose
> some control over it if it's on the main website. I'm not very
> knowledgeable about how easy it is to edit stuff and so forth. Can anyone
> comment?

Not actually, they could be "maintained" by the same people who does it
now, just will use another infra. Unless there are global problems
affecting the whole website (like some issue on includes -if happens
to use the same look and feel- or something like that) the d-w site
could be as independant as people wants it to. 

wml files from CVS are procesed every day and the changes go to the
real w.d.o in HTML output. I don't know much about webpages using PHP
and db's, like nm.d.o but the only difference I can see is the initial
"task" for setting it up for admins (and the wait for them to aprove that).

> > Doing so could probably open a new door to give women an opportunity
> > to give their contribution to the project : I bet that some would
> > first work on the d-w part....then slowly begin to contribute to the
> > general web site. IIRC, several women in the project have good web
> > site design skills.
> That seems to be the general path currently, yeah.
> Does anyone else have an opinion?

I do agree on this, probably having d-w listed on w.d.o/devel would be
good also.


Rudy Godoy | 0x3433BD21 | http://stone-head.org               ,''`.
http://www.apesol.org  -  http://www.debian.org              : :' :
GPG FP: 0D12 8537 607E 2DF5 4EFB  35A7 550F 1A00 3433 BD21   `. `'

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: