On 01/25/2013 11:01 PM, Nick Kew wrote: > > On 25 Jan 2013, at 13:21, Daniel Gruno wrote: > >> [ ] +1: I support this proposal >> [ ] 0: I don't care >> [ ] -1: I don't support this proposal, because... > > -1 as stated. +1 in principle. > > IMHO it needs a tiny change. Instead of creating a messy new > DNS entry for "modules-archive", it should live under a single > hostname: maybe modules.apache.org/archive/ > > I can't access modules.humbedooh.com right now, but I'll > take what's there as of secondary importance: it's presumably > intended more as startingpoint than final product. > If people do not object to this, I believe we can accommodate your wish to put it under /archive instead without having to resort to a new vote. Anyone who's opposed to Nick's suggestion, please state so, or I will assume that we can continue the voting with this addendum.
Apologies for the test site not being available at the time, it has been fixed now. And yes, it's a starting point. The whole point of this vote is to get _started_ on moving away from something that is utterly dysfunctional, and towards something that works and is simpler to manage. Once the voting is done, assuming no one starts throwing vetoes about, I will start a new thread, calling for ideas and suggestions on how to improve the new site, and as I've stated earlier, I am looking for anyone who would like to contribute to maintaining and improving the site. As it stands, we have Rich, Gavin, Jan from Infrastructure (I hope/think) and myself doing moderation and reviewing the processes, but we'd like more to join. With regards, Daniel.
