Re: [perldoc2-developers] General Questions

[Joergen W. L. <joe...@gm...>]

Robert 'phaylon' Sedlacek schrieb:

> I'll concentrate on the points being separate from the spec then :)

[...]

> I'm not sure if it's a good idea to include a bboard into the codebase, as
> this just adds up work distracting from the real thing[tm]. For example,
> the german perl community has a self written board which is in
> re-development. It surely isn't perfect, but it might be fitting for our
> purposes.

Sorry for being so unclear. I did not think of including anything like 
BBoard or Forum capabilities directly into the codebase (that's why I 
put them under "additional features" in the specification, maybe 
should've called them "add-ons" or something...).

We definitely should focus on the creation of the platform itself.

Although I feel that things like a BBoard, forum or whatever means of 
communication are very neccessary features they should not clutter up 
the codebase.

>> With "resources" I meant things like glossaries that might be available
>> to transalators or other people. Maybe people could have their own
>> glossary or dictionary.
> 
> Now I get it. ++ to that then.

:o) There you go.

>> -T comes to mind. The things you mention above could probably be
>> incorporated in some sort of "coding guideline" for the project. For the
>> moment I do not think, we need this, since the people involved had
>> enough time to learn from their own mistakes already, right? ;o))
> 
> Guidelines are certainly good. If we want to keep it maintainable we also
> shouldn't start adding dependencies like there's no tomorrow. So we might
> want to discuss those things separately.

Sorry, not clear. What do you mean by "dependencies" is in this context?

> [stability issues]
> 
> That's rather a deployment and development issue imho. We should certainly
> do testruns before deploying/updating the main site. Things like PAR could
> also help us with this, as it captures a whole environment (optionally
> even including core modules).

Or one step further - and you have something like apachefriends.org's 
XAMPP project.

>> This might be important if we start developing the platform on SF and
>> then have to move it to whatever the final destination might be.
> 
> Well, SF can't run it anyway, can it? It should be possible for developers
> of the platform to check it out and run it on their own systems. Another
> neutral systems before regular deployments to the end site would imho be
> another good idea, too.

Well - there's webspace, there's perl, there's shell access - what else 
do we need? Apart from that I do agree to the point of checking out and 
testing locally.

BTW - There's plenty of space on my server... :o)

Joergen