I would say, let's have a finalized design and a logo that everyone approves of. After that, we can exlore more options about hosting and stuff, but until then, there's no point on arguing about such things.
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Ross Kendall <[email protected]> wrote: > On 16/10/12 12:30, Robin Burchell wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 1:18 PM, Ross Kendall <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> I can understand how at this point it might be practical for using github >>> for versioning rapidly developing UX guidelines, but isn't the wiki >>> suitable >>> for this kind of thing? It can keep track of changes as well. >>> >> The problem with using a wiki is that there is no enforced review of >> changes by the people maintaining it, which is something that a UX >> guideline really requires if you're going to keep some kind of >> consistency. Sure, there's workarounds for this, but why not just put >> it through the same process we have for everything else? >> > Fair enough, that makes sense. > > Also, in terms of a general Nemo website wouldn't it make sense to use a >>> CMS? >>> >> More infrastructure means more hosting requirements and more time >> involved in setting it up and keeping it running, so I'd say "no, it >> doesn't make sense" >> > I don't imagine the website is very high traffic that it would need more > physical infrastructure to run a CMS. What if someone was offering to help > with setting it up? > > > >
