[Seattle-editorial] RE: [Seattletech] New website codebase

[brandon]

I've omitted imc-tech and imc-seattle media from this mail.

Summarizing our decisions and research as we go seems critical. the issues
are complex so I suggest discussing them on the seattle-editorial list, but
updating summaries on this wiki page:
http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Local/SeaTechCodebaseEvaluation 
ALSO, updates should be sent to the seattletech list.

The april 2001 decisions were wiki-fied:
http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Local/SeaTechWebsiteApril2001Decisions

I created the following page for a log of website changes, and a place to
suggest NON-CODEBASE specific website changes:
http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Local/SeaTechWebsiteChanges
For example, a white background can be done with any codebase. As with all
wiki pages... If you don't like it, please improve it. :)

And, three thoughts:

1) no seattle web server 
Contrary to the impression I got from micah's comment
(http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/seattle-editorial/2003-August/003380.h
tml), I thought we had consensed that we lack the local geeks to create a
seattle web server. Does anyone disagree? (i.e. how many people can
personally commit to managing a seattle based web server?)

2) limit our codebase options
If seattle is to be a test case for the global tech collective (which I
think is a great idea), then perhaps they should tell us which codebases
stallman can support. If we pick A, and stallman will only support B, C or
D, then we have wasted some effort. 

Also, even if we all agree that the FOO-BAR codebase has great features, but
there's only one developer working on it, nobody in seattle knows the
language it's written in, and it's known to have a steep learning curve,
then perhaps we should eliminate it as an option up front. 

3) who will do the work?
Perhaps we need a better idea of who is willing to work on the CODE of this
project (both the data conversion and the design customization). 

As well, it __might__ be smart to listen more closely to seattle people who
are ready and able to actually work on this project.

peace,
brandon

> -----Original Message-----
> From: seattletech-bounces at lists.indymedia.org 
> [mailto:seattletech-bounces at lists.indymedia.org] On Behalf Of 
> Jason Reep
> Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 1:05 PM
> To: seattle-editorial at indymedia.org
> Cc: seattletech at indymedia.org; imc-tech at indymedia.org; 
> imc-seattle-media at indymedia.org
> Subject: [Seattletech] New website codebase
> 
> 
> Ok,
> 
> so as far as I can tell, there is a consensus that we need to adopt a
> new code base for the Seattle IMC web page. There has been a welcome
> increase in editorial participation in recent weeks which 
> could make NOW
> a good time to initiate the process of switching to a newer better
> codebase.  There are many good reasons to switch, including, to name a
> few in no particular order: categorization, ratings, more 
> readable/appealing color schemes, better organization of comments, 
> editorial flexability, etc..  Also, I am beginning to hear murmurings 
> that the status of Stallman (IMC web server that hosts ours and many 
> other IMC websites) may be in question.
> 
> Basically, I'd like to poll for consensus on one of the options.  The
> global IMC tech team has offered (or is preparing to/considering 
> offering?) assistance in migrating IMC websites, including 
> archives, to 
> certain among several options for new a codebase. While this will 
> undoubtedly create some technical problems that will require 
> theirs and 
> our attention, I think that we need to jump on the offer 
> before it goes 
> away.  Let's encourage them in their work by volunteering to 
> be a test case.
> 
> Please take a look at the wiki that lists the current codebases being
> used by IMC's and have a look at some of the sites that are using the
> different ones and make your opinions known.  The tech 
> collective is not
> interested in helping support all of the different 
> code-bases.  The top
> options seem to be Dada, Mir and SF Active, though spip (Perl based?)
> has had some mention too.
> 
> I'm not sure where the appropriate place to continue this 
> discussions. 
> There is a Seattle Code base wiki page already built but so 
> far wiki use 
> doesn't seem to have taken off for Seattle collective members and I 
> wouldn't want the question to wallow there for lack of eyeballs. 
> Personally, I think that the editorial list is an reasonable place to 
> discuss it.
> 
> If not now, when?
> 
> code base list:
> http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Devel/WebHome
> 
> other IMC's opinions and experiences with code migration:
> http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Devel/OpinonsExperiences
> 
> Seattle Code base evaluation wiki page:
> http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Local/SeaTechCodebaseEvaluation
> 
> What sites are running what code:
> http://www.bandwidthcoop.org/imc/tech/WhatSitesAreRunningWhat
> 
> jonathan's redesign sandbox
> http://www.deepmedia.org/imc/
> 
> some recent discussion (read the threads):
>
http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/seattle-editorial/2003-August/003380.ht
ml
http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/seattle-editorial/2003-April/003228.htm
l
there was a lot of discussion about features and design back in the 
spring of 2001 as well, but I'm not going to spend the time right now to 
find the archived emails.  Anyone have that info handy?

draft offer of tech collective assistance (unsure of it's official-ness):
http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-tech/2003-August/011658.html





_______________________________________________
Seattletech mailing list
Seattletech at lists.indymedia.org
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/seattletech