On 5/31/06, Thomas Lockney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm thinking more along the lines of persistent group communication. Case in
point: with the new book review program, I've been trying to figure out a
good place to put the various guidelines for the reviews. Also, it would be
nice to have a place to put the various suggestions for how we want to
handle the reviews. These sorts of things don't lend themselves well to
something that could fit within the catherder.

Heh -- I'm actively working on Herder 2.0 (which I'm happy to
collaborate on, though it's basically just an AR model and a handful
of Camping controllers at this point) which does include a book review
module...but your point is well-taken. Even the features that *are* in
the cat herder are quite poorly documented at this point, which I
consider a bug.

Book reviews are also something I consider to be a special case, as
they are inherently pretty different from the "anyone can post and
edit" model of a traditional Wiki. Really, you want to solicit reviews
only from people who have actually read the book, and once written,
each review should be fairly static -- it's not an ongoing
conversation, so much as an impression at-the-moment.

Regardless of the Cat Herder feature-set, some more "permanent" web
presence for the group does seem appropriate, which could be based on
a Wiki, blogging engine, or even (*gasp*) simple static HTML, updated
as needed via SFTP. The current catch-all behavior of the herder is
unfortuante, as it has (for example) precluded putting a read-only
archive of the old wiki online.

For that matter, a lot of the ideas related to the foscon/oscamp discussions
might also be handy to have in a central place since people tend to ask
questions about it on and off over time.

That is also a good point, though it's worth remembering that the
relationship between FOSCON and PDX.rb is more or less an historical
accident, especially as we start to talk about being more inclusive of
other user groups. I can't help but wonder if a Backpack or Basecamp
project devoted solely to FOSCON might not be a better fit.

I think there is a lot more going on in the group than there was maybe a
year ago (I was only watching the mailing list and wasn't even in Portland
at the time, so I can't speak authoritatively). It would be nice to have
someplace to post random items of interest for the group as a whole.

The group has certainly grown, but I think that activity levels have
always been bursty, which is much of the problem: our percieved need
to communication and record-keeping tools at one of the peaks of group
activity is very different from that when we're in a lull.

When the discussion dies down, we see the old resources (like the
previous Wiki, or the cat herder) go stale, and often die out before
the next time activity picks up. Case in point: our previous Instiki
instance is sitting on the PA server, waiting to be brought back to
life, because no one has cared/had time/been able to nurse it back to
health.

To be fair, the old wiki was, IIRC, based on an early Instiki-AR
branch, and basically so flaky as to be unusuable. The point remains,
however, that this is a road we've been down before, and I simply want
to advise caution before we set off on yet another great Quest for a
collaboration tool.

I think one of the keys to maintaining a group wiki is for there to be at
least one person (preferrably more) who "sheppards" the wiki. Granted, in
our rather loose organization it might be hard to get this going, but I
think we're reaching the stage where it is a possibility at least.

This is of course a given, and something that has historically
bacially fallen to whoever did the initial setup/hosting for the wiki,
as well as anyone who they deputize. In this case, that would probably
mean intially anyone with shell access to the pdxruby hosting account
at PA, which has been a fairly non-exclusive group AFAIK.

I'm not trying to discourage people from setting up resources for the
group to share, only cautioning against automatically reaching for a
set of tools that have been tried and abandoned in the past. Aside
from FOSCON-related information, I'm still just not seeing the big
picture for what kinds of information we're going to be maintaining
that can't either be added to the herder, or simply archived naturally
as list traffic.

-Lennon
_______________________________________________
PDXRuby mailing list
[email protected]
IRC: #pdx.rb on irc.freenode.net
http://lists.pdxruby.org/mailman/listinfo/pdxruby

Reply via email to