>> After 0.2, we used something like 50GB of bandwidth in three days.
>> Hopefully 0.3 will be even more popular, and so anything that
>> involves none of us having to pay for that seems like a good
>> solution.  I would advocate putting as much of the site on GNA as
>> possible.  Use the website area in svn with SSI for the main pages,
>> and the download area for automatically-generated documentation.  I'm
>> not sure what to suggest for the blog.  I found a support item from
>> 2004 saying GNA planned on supporting PHP 'soon,' but as of 2007 they
>> still don't.  They do support Apache SSI, which apparently allows the
>> running of external programs, but I'm not entirely sure how one would
>> go about using this.  Without this, allowing comments is quite hard.
>
>   I agree here mostly to use GNA space.
>   I also want to mention that I don't really like to allow users
>   put comments everywhere (blog, wiki, etc).
>   It is really hard to find them all and reply back.
>   I rather pool all the discussion on maillist and SILC.
>   To me, blog and wiki are just a place for publish,
>   not discussion.

One thing I would say counter to this, where comments are extremely  
important, is the API documentation. PHP and Actionscript, the two  
languages I use most often, use an "official documentation followed  
by comments" model, and I find that very useful. Oftentimes the  
comments have more useful real-world examples and better explanations  
than the docs themselves, so I would like to see that model continued  
on our site as well.

J.



_______________________________________________
Etoile-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/etoile-discuss

Répondre à