On Thu, 2009-07-23 at 11:09 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote: > On Thu, 2009-07-23 at 06:15 -0600, P Chenthill wrote: > > We would still need to maintain the old data to know the history though > > they may become obsolete. Certainly a lot of things mentioned still hold > > true ;) > > A compromise might be to only migrate the pages with current and > accurate information to l.g.o, and keep go-evolution.org around as a > historical archive. Archived pages brought back to life at a later date > could be migrated individually. It -is- a wiki, after all. Makes sense. How about putting the architecture and other historic data on roadmaps into www.gnome.org/projects/evolution and current pages in l.g.o ?
Close go-evolution.org once for all. - Chenthill. > > Might be interesting to compile a list of pages we still maintain or > care about. I have a few not listed on the front page (BugzillaTopics > and ReleaseHOWTO, for example). > > Perhaps a bigger issue is converting the page markup. I've noticed > syntactic differences between the two sites , but I don't even know > what wiki software the two sites are using. Need to see if there's > markup migration scripts out there. > > Matthew Barnes > > >  live.gnome.org's markup syntax seems way more expressive and is > actually DOCUMENTED! (http://live.gnome.org/HelpOnEditing) Unlike > our own. (http://www.go-evolution.org/Help:Editing) Not to mention > the style sheets are prettier. _______________________________________________ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolutionemail@example.com http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers