Re: [Cscene-discuss] Testing.. and babbling

[<j....@t-...>]

On Tue, 4 Jan 2000 19:10:56 -0600, ix...@cs... wrote:

>say we will do that stuff via CVS at souce forge. thats fine... what about
>adding new articles? and moderating them etc? maybe that is done on at a diff
>place? thats what i am asking... what are your ideas. 

This question can only be answered in large parts if we know what
technology we use for publishing. If it's database-driven (which it
should be), then adding an article to the database does it. Note that
"database" could be a text file.

>Then we have the public layout. We have the front page and where it gets us.
>Searching is often asked for feature. What about mirrors? 

OK, let me outline my thoughts:

1. We should use a technology that is batch-enabled, so mirrors work
like always (copying the static html result) or online (doing the batch
processing themselves).

2. That batch process can take the CVS repository and process what is
there in a way that creates the site. That process can involve SQL
database updates, creation of index lists, applying site layout, etc
pp.

3. Candidates for that batch process: Perl/Python scripts, a C++
program, XML (which would be my favourite). 

Using XML would make it easy to produce a consistent and easily
changeable site layout. Only ONE site has to be XML enabled, the result
can be static HTML. Markup of index keywords is also very easy. XML
processing can be online or batched.

>What features can we add and still have the current mirrors?

See 1. above.

> what about searching with mirrors... 

Either they point to cscene or install the necessary stuff. Like you
yourself already outlined...

>3. mailing lists.
>
>will all be via source forge i imagine. maybe a new issue list should be setup?
>my only other issue is what about lists using the cscene domain?  i can host
>them no problem.

I think the cscene READER lists should be on cscene, the PROJECT lists
on sourceforge.

>4. new issues.
>
>how should issues be released? instant from CVS? every 24 hours? every 2 weeks?

Should we HAVE issues? :))

I think we should have article states (NEW, INREVIEW, ACKNOWLEDGED,
PUBLISHED). The change from ACKNOWLEDGED --> PUBLISHED is part of the
batch process. Whether you change that instantly (i.e. publish articles
as soon as they are ack'd) or every two weeks is then a minor change
and a political rather than a technical issue.

Ciao, Jürgen