From: Pavel C. <pc...@ib...> - 2009-11-30 14:48:00
|
Dmitry Yemanov napsal(a): > > I thought there should be some decision making group to be created and > introduced here, which is expected to be responsible. Now you speak > about various activities, but I still have no idea how it's going to be > managed. While I volunteer to assist, I don't see my role in this effort > yet. First, the decision group already exists (everybody from the project who cares), and hangs on right here in this list. Second, it couldn't be *responsible* for anything, as it's just talking heads. Only workers could be responsible for their work. Certainly they would keep up "fixing" their work until the "decision group" would be happy, as it's our usual routine. However, it wouldn't make any sense to have all generals and no indians, so I managed to secure two indians, me and Helen. It means that we have allocated time to do some actual work, and we're going to do some initial groundwork that has to be done before more hands could start to work on more content, actual design, layout, graphics, whatever. What we're going to do is breaking up the current site content we'd like to carry on into chunks of data without markup (actually, reStructured Text) and basic code/data structures for repeating data patterns to be used in templates, and some plumbing code for the site so one could see something assembled from content. We'll also produce some *raw* templates along the lines discussed here. Then everybody can play with the page templates to define actual layout, create more content etc. So, right now, there is nothing and nobody we could *manage*, except us, and until the initial work isn't done, so the final site could start to get shape, we would just go in circles and nothing would get done. If anybody wants to participate in the ground work, its welcome. But it's really boring and nothing interesting there. The actual fun and "decision making" would start once you would have brinks you can use to build the site, but so far there aren't any and anything we would sketch here without them would be just cloud castles on paper. Hence I would like suggest to wrap the initial phase of discussion as it seems that we have settled on *raw* site structure and it's enough information to start the groundwork. I'll inform you here once the basic blocks would be ready so you can start to carve the new site. However, as I mentioned previously, it will not happen overnight. It would take at least a week, and we have to QA and get out the 2.5 RC1 first and we also have regular jobs. best regards Pavel Cisar |
From: Paul V. <pa...@vi...> - 2009-11-30 15:10:22
|
Pavel Cisar wrote, > If anybody wants to participate in the ground work, its welcome. > But it's really boring and nothing interesting there. But it has to be done. I can spare a few hours (not a lot!), so if I can do something useful please let me know. Paul Vinkenoog |
From: Giovanni P. <gpr...@so...> - 2009-11-30 16:00:26
|
Pavel Cisar wrote: > It means that we have allocated time to do some actual work, and > we're going to do some initial groundwork that has to be done before > more hands could start to work on more content, actual design, layout, > graphics, whatever. Work that could be shared with the community, if only you would share it with us. It would also be a good starting point for most of us to get our hands dirty. By the way reStructuredText and the template structures *are* management decisions. -- Giovanni Premuda |
From: Pavel C. <pc...@ib...> - 2009-11-30 17:21:30
|
Giovanni Premuda napsal(a): > Pavel Cisar wrote: >> It means that we have allocated time to do some actual work, and >> we're going to do some initial groundwork that has to be done >> before more hands could start to work on more content, actual >> design, layout, graphics, whatever. >> > Work that could be shared with the community, if only you would share > it with us. It would also be a good starting point for most of us to > get our hands dirty. If there will be something to share, we'll certainly share it. Right now, there is nothing to share, yet. > By the way reStructuredText and the template structures *are* > management decisions. No, they're *technical* decisions. And both could be easily changed anytime down the road. If you really need to know *everything* at micromanagement level, then I deliberately decided to use reStructured Text because: 0. We have to use something instead HTML. 1. I know it well. 2. It's basically just a plain text that doesn't need any special tools to edit it, has no markup (well, sort of minimal for some things and it's actually more a writing convention than real markup) and could be easily transformed programmatically to whatever markup we would eventually decide to use. 3. I'm going to hack up some code for automatic conversion from HTML to reStructured Text, so we don't need to clean it up manually and can focus on shuffling simple blocks of text around. So, the rationale is that we would quickly and with minimal effort convert HTML into "portable" format that's easy to work with for everyone while it doesn't impose any significant restriction for further processing and "change of mind" any time later. About templates, their format wasn't decided yet. I'll worry about it once we'll get to that, but now it's premature. Anyway, it could be changed any time, although the set of options would be certainly limited to those supported by underlying technology behind the site. best regards Pavel Cisar |
From: Giovanni P. <gpr...@so...> - 2009-11-30 18:03:44
|
Pavel Cisar wrote: > If you really need to know *everything* at micromanagement level, then I > deliberately decided to use reStructured Text because: > Sorry Pavel, I throw the towel again. My hope was that you and Helen started thinking in a community perspective *in order to get more volunteers to do actual work!* Good luck with *your* site. Giovanni -- Giovanni Premuda |
From: Giovanni P. <gpr...@so...> - 2009-11-30 18:10:55
|
Pavel Cisar wrote: > If there will be something to share, we'll certainly share it. Right > now, there is nothing to share, yet. > OK, now we have language problems. What I mean is to share the *burden* of the work to be done, i.e. divide the work with other volunteers. Not the *results* of the work. -- Giovanni Premuda |
From: Pavel C. <pc...@ib...> - 2009-11-30 18:36:36
|
Giovanni Premuda napsal(a): > Pavel Cisar wrote: >> If there will be something to share, we'll certainly share it. Right >> now, there is nothing to share, yet. >> > OK, now we have language problems. What I mean is to share the *burden* > of the work to be done, i.e. divide the work with other volunteers. > Not the *results* of the work. But do you understand that we yet have to get to the point where the work could be shared? It means that we have to prepare the chunks of work that could be divided and shared by many in a way that people wouldn't step on each other toes, including at least brief instructions for tasks need to be done. Or do you want us just to dump everything that makes our current site as is on you without any instruction what, where and how we would like to get from here to there? Please, be patient. It will all come and you would have plenty of opportunities to get your hands dirty if you'd be interested. best regards Pavel Cisar |
From: Dmitry Y. <fir...@ya...> - 2009-12-01 10:16:33
|
Pavel Cisar wrote: > > First, the decision group already exists (everybody from the project who > cares), and hangs on right here in this list. Second, it couldn't be > *responsible* for anything, as it's just talking heads. Only workers > could be responsible for their work. Somebody must be responsible for coordination (e.g. between the project and the web developers by Marius) and for spending the collected money properly ;-) Also, we had an agreement that it makes no sense to decide everything by the public voting, but sometimes the workers may not be responsible for particular decisions either (e.g. the web designer suggesting a visual style totally conflicting with the Firebird image), so somebody should take care about those decisions. That was my point. But as soon as your words imply me being inside the decision making group, I'm not going to argue anymore <g> Instead, I'll be just making sure everything goes well. Dmitry |