Summary:
1. Why not a zope2.org site?
2. Tentative, shaky suggestion on maintenance of website
Hi,
Sorry for this post from someone not contributing at all. My only contribution
to zope ( apart from making a hundred or so people aware of it and a couple of
dozens attempt to adopt it on a
Stephan, thank for answer, and sorry for delay.
My approach to make some useful services and motivate people to use them.
We need zope3.org with easy, pretty, web2.0 design and very useful
services for community. I hope if we make some base parts of my plan
then we cover most of community
Uwe Oestermeier wrote:
I continued the work on the wikification and the Zope2.org importer. At
least in principle we can take over most of the existing Zope3Dev wiki
automatically (without comments at the moment). But without a review of
what is outdated and still important this does not make
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Sunday 13 November 2005 13:37, netlander wrote:
I can help to review existing Zope3Dev wiki.
May be create list: wiki -- status.
Statuses may be:
-- outdated
-- under development (still requires further agreement)
-- recomended (tried and tested)
RIght?
Note
Hi Stephan, Hi Uwe,
Approach:
- Step 1. Separate wiki by community process levels.
- Step 2. Synchronization wiki (documentation) with Zope3 realeases.
Step 1. Separate wiki by process levels.
In compliance with enterprise
P.S.
I repeat here all lists and images:
http://www.zope.org/Members/netlander/index.html
Sorry, link above not viewable.
Better here:
http://en.netlander.org/projects/wikiImport
--
Regards,
Valeri Lazarev
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Hi Valeri,
I can help to review existing Zope3Dev wiki.
May be create list: wiki -- status.
Statuses may be:
-- outdated
-- under development (still requires further agreement)
-- recomended (tried and tested)
RIght?
Such a list would be very useful. But I think the states recommended and
On Sunday 13 November 2005 13:37, netlander wrote:
I can help to review existing Zope3Dev wiki.
May be create list: wiki -- status.
Statuses may be:
-- outdated
-- under development (still requires further agreement)
-- recomended (tried and tested)
RIght?
Note that those type of tags
On Tuesday 18 October 2005 21:12, Mikhail Kashkin wrote:
I'm also want to offer me as fresh meat in this effort.
My proposition for site plan, index pages *mark*::
Hi Mikhail,
the outline is nice, but contains items that we do not have already; for
example it has a huge documentation section
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Tuesday 18 October 2005 21:12, Mikhail Kashkin wrote:
I'm also want to offer me as fresh meat in this effort.
My proposition for site plan, index pages *mark*::
Having said this, I really wish someone would take ownership in developing our
zope3.org site.
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Tuesday 11 October 2005 12:41, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
If anyone here really needs WYSIWYG, please make a point, but I doubt that
there will be one...
It's a top priority for Jim. Uwe and I agreed we would prefer ReST.
I got the impression from Jim that
Hey Mats,
Thanks for joining this discussion!
Mats Nordgren wrote:
My name is Mats, I've visited #zope-dev under the nick gnosis. I've long
been a fan of Zope but very inactive in the community. I'm not much of a
programmer and always had a hard time grepping Zope2. Zope3 has made great
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Tuesday 11 October 2005 12:41, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
If anyone here really needs WYSIWYG, please make a point, but I doubt that
there will be one...
It's a top priority for Jim. Uwe and I agreed we would prefer ReST.
I would definitely prefer
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Hey Philipp,
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
[snip]
Here's my 2 cents, even if I might be too late (but hey, when should
I have brought this up?): I think it's a *bad* idea to host Zope 3 on
its own site, because:
a) It will be yet another systems we need maintainance
Why is WYSIWYG so important? Who's going to be editing all of that? I
don't want another zopewiki.org. I think that zopewiki.org is a good
site and that there should be an area of the site that's like that
which may be open to the world - but I'd like serious / fun / USABLE
documentation to be
Martijn Faassen schrieb:
Hi there,
I'm very curious to see what work was done on a Zope 3 website at the
Neckar sprint. Can someone send a report to the list?
The plan has been to migrate all the Wiki pages from zope.org to zope3.org.
The new thing is, that Wikipages should be editable
Tonico Strasser wrote:
Martijn Faassen schrieb:
Hi there,
I'm very curious to see what work was done on a Zope 3 website at the
Neckar sprint. Can someone send a report to the list?
The plan has been to migrate all the Wiki pages from zope.org to zope3.org.
Interesting, and a bit sad to
I couldn't disagree more.
Moving Zope3 off of Zope.org is a big mistake. Zope 3 is part of Zope is
it not? Shouldn't it be on that website?
It just seems silly and short-sighted to try to break out one from the
other, when all Zopes (1/2/3..10/11/12) belong on that one website.
Wasn't that
Benji York wrote:
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
b) It is exactly the opposite of what we've been trying to do for the
last couple of months: convergence, not divergence!
I think that differentiating Zope 3 from Zope 2 is a good thing.
Sure. I never said that their differences
Hey Philipp,
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
[snip]
Here's my 2 cents, even if I might be too late (but hey, when should
I have brought this up?): I think it's a *bad* idea to host Zope 3 on
its own site, because:
a) It will be yet another systems we need maintainance volunteers
for. As it
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Here's my 2 cents, even if I might be too late (but hey, when should
I have brought this up?): I think it's a *bad* idea to host Zope 3 on
its own site, because:
a) It will be yet another systems we need maintainance volunteers
for. As it seems we don't even have
On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 03:53:23PM +0200, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Perhaps we can come up with a similar scenario as what we think is going
to happen with Zope 2 and Zope 3. Zope 2 is the old, hard to maintain
system here, Zope 3 the new cool system. We intend to improve Zope 2 by
adding in
Martijn Faassen schrieb:
...
Has work been done on a reasonably slick layout for the website as well
or is this still planned?
Don't know about plans. After a short discussion on the sprint we have
agreed on starting with a very simple layout. It's not finished yet, it
should contain those
On Tuesday 11 October 2005 09:36, Jake wrote:
Why not spend the time and energy making Zope.org a better place than just
moving it off to yet another under-developed and utilized website?
zope.org has very different requirements than zope3.org. The reason we want
our own system is that we need
On Tuesday 11 October 2005 09:46, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
If you want to point out Zope 2's and Zope 3's differences, we can't
have information floating around on separate sites. The top #1 questions
on #zope that have to do with Zope 3 are:
1. Is Zope 3 mature enough to be developed
On Tuesday 11 October 2005 09:53, Martijn Faassen wrote:
From what I can see, the sprint focused on using Zope 3 technologies to
build a Zope 3 site. To use Zope 3 for a Zope 3 site seems a good idea
from the marketing perspective already -- we want to demonstrate we can
eat our own dogfood.
On Tuesday 11 October 2005 10:23, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
The whole WYSIWYG HTML-edit wiki thing is a neat idea involving using
HTML as the wiki markup language instead of something else. We'll
just have to see how that works out.
Yes, I just wonder whether we have to think about
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Tuesday 11 October 2005 09:36, Jake wrote:
Why not spend the time and energy making Zope.org a better place
than just moving it off to yet another under-developed and utilized
website?
zope.org has very different requirements than zope3.org. The reason
we want our
Reinoud van Leeuwen wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 03:53:23PM +0200, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Perhaps we can come up with a similar scenario as what we think is going
to happen with Zope 2 and Zope 3. Zope 2 is the old, hard to maintain
system here, Zope 3 the new cool system. We intend to
On Tuesday 11 October 2005 12:20, Martijn Faassen wrote:
[snip]
zope.org will be very heavy. zope3.org will be very light; a simple
Wiki-like site that promotes collaboration. Even marketing is out of
scope right now.
Can you point me to the place where this was decided? Zope 3 is
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Tuesday 11 October 2005 12:20, Martijn Faassen wrote:
[snip]
zope.org will be very heavy. zope3.org will be very light; a simple
Wiki-like site that promotes collaboration. Even marketing is out of
scope right now.
Can you point me to the place where this was
On 10/11/05, Philipp von Weitershausen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- a ZWiki on a bare Zope 2 is set up within minutes
A ZWiki as found on the current zope.org is unusable, so I'll presume
you mean an up-to-date ZWiki, which I expect is much nicer.
Again (and I'm saying this again with the
Fred Drake wrote:
On 10/11/05, Philipp von Weitershausen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- a ZWiki on a bare Zope 2 is set up within minutes
A ZWiki as found on the current zope.org is unusable, so I'll presume
you mean an up-to-date ZWiki, which I expect is much nicer.
Of course.
Again (and I'm
On Tuesday 11 October 2005 12:41, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
If anyone here really needs WYSIWYG, please make a point, but I doubt that
there will be one...
It's a top priority for Jim. Uwe and I agreed we would prefer ReST.
Regards,
Stephan
--
Stephan Richter
CBU Physics Chemistry
For reference, http://zopewiki.org is an up-to-date zope 2 zwiki (see
joyful.com for others), with mail-out/mail-in/external editor etc.
enabled. If you haven't checked it recently, please do check the new
organization by audience (down the left of the front page).
I did a html-only zwiki
On 10/11/05, Simon Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PS - I believe you can predict a site's and its project's success based
on whether it f*ks^H^H^H shrinks the fonts. Seriously. :) php.net,
drupal.org, gnome.org, debian.org leave the font alone.
You may be on to something. :-)
New theory:
36 matches
Mail list logo
