hello,
> welcome all suggestions and input. I hope over the next few weeks to revamp
> some of the sections but I would also like to encourage anyone in the
> community who would like to write to think about dropping me an e-mail.
>
thanks a lot for updating news and the new website itself. The changes
reflect the state of a development toolkit for experts. Before going
into detail I'd like to summarize that the range of target users for the
new website may have grown while the informational range shrunk to a
technical report about architecture. My impression is that midgards web
site now looks more like an update than a complete summary of the past,
present and future of midgard. A focal point of my (hopefully
constructive ) critics are the missing admin surfaces oldadmin and
asgard as starting applications. They are not completely missing and are
kept the same way on the predecessors web site. But as a toolkit midgard
may be better shown by it's visualized shapes. Also the announcement
1.4.2 mentions asgard as an application beside nadmin. This may let the
reader think the first time it's commercial or a demo.
That's why I tried to see it from both other sites (rather than from
third prof site). My impressions is summarized by pro+cons and results
in a facit about the rubrics page.
0. First page
I. About midgard
II. References
III. Documentation
- a beginner or just a private web user maybe with a small
commercial enterprise
- my first impression when I started with midgard at 3/01
- web software development/application developer
0. The first page: The homepage of midgard-project gained simplicity
from the new design and lost the mystics from the former homepage.
- advantage: The image with 4 men ( no woman at the whole staff group
all the time ? ) gives some personality to midgard.
- disadvantage: No personalities by names or further description about
the 'who is who '
facit: The page layout changed it state from an attractive nice and
handsome idealism to the ' hard & real works'
I. About midgard:
Midgard is a powerfull toolkit, - if you are an experienced expert in
linux based open source development. Maybe common users ( especially non
commercial ) leave the site already at this point. Maybe because they
think midgard is for developers only. Maybe structures and images from
free admin applications are missing or maybe better in the foreground.
When I came first to the former midgard site I was impressed by two
parts:
1. The images from the grey wolves acting. In my neighbourhood is a
medevial accessory shop
2. The demo server that gives immediate overview about what midgard is
all about.
- advantage: Now all new features of the toolkit API on a quick glance
- disadvantage: Interfacing web applications e.g. Asgard is missing
under main features.
facit: midgard is rather applicative for developers than for users
(private+commercial) in the common sense
II. References:
first of all the demo server is missing as the ultimate reference for
midgard. Also the asgard demo server of aurora is missing (or hidden too
much) as the free administration web application for midgard. To me it
was the first and best reference of midgard
In general another good reference to my eyes for an outstanding observer
is the open source community and the spectrum of their international
people working together.
I'm working for the european aerospace company that constructed the
european modul called 'Columbus' for the International Space Station
(ISS) called 'Freedom'. Most credits and sympathies for the billions of
Euros (wasted?) came from the cultural challenge and the vision of the
global village in space. Also, at Astrium-Space Infrastructure we have
many problems in common with an open global software development group.
However companies and commercial appliances have always taken part on
the former website of midgard. In comparison to the web site's
predecessor the commercial part has grown. On first look the share of
open source references may have shrunk.
As a german visitor of the site my major interest for the current and
the former web site was a german user group for midgard. I remember that
the first contact with midgard came from www.linuxde.org a german linux
portal. Germany is said to be one of the most active countries for linux
promotion . At midgard it is mentioned to have a midgard community
(around stuttgart ?). But where ?
The most interesting reference to me was the interview with emiliano and
jukka at devshed from 7/99. The definition of midgard and content
management given by jukka is probably the shortest and best one. The
best private reference was Torbens homepage because I finished studies
at the same university in 1990 (FHF) ;-)
- advantage: midgard appears rather to be a round product than a toolkit
for and under development
- disadvantage: hardliners of open source development may ask about the
future development
facit: Torn between commercial marketing and open source development
questions about the people on the front line and behind midgard kept
more in a background.
III. Documentation
As we all know documentation is the achilles-heel of midgard. This is
nothing special or even natural with midgard because every active
project lacks of mature documentation. Maybe final documentation can
only be derived after people someday may say that midgard development
is "dead" or frozen :-( But if source code, experience and practice is
the best documentation I wondered why the asgard administration web
application is almost kept as a secret on the site ? However I entered
'asgard' into the search page and found 18 hits.
On the other hand many other documentation still valid from the
predecessor web site is missing now:
The FAQ, the predecessor of the manual (1.2.x), flip scharts, and some
developer reports ( I remember the report for transfering content and
pages from 1.2.5 to 1.4 with a special tool ). The annotations of the
former site are missing, though I saw it never at work.
I still believe the current midgard manual to be current and not
outdated. It's some kind of ingenius from Jukka how long the durability
of the manual may last. I almost know it by heart. But the first time
I read it I had to forget it because after installation I missed first
steps to start writing applications. I took them from the predecessor
manual. However to me it's out of the question that the best
documentation for the code, for practice and presentation comes directly
from the admin web applications. Therefor documentation maybe the third
reason why asgard should be used for presentating midgard.
- advantage: The documentation is short, still up to date, and gives
compact outlines to midgard
- disadvantage: Many good approaches from the predecessor are missing.
Asgard should be better descripted
facit: Many first steps after installation but also many features could
not be used without the discussion forum.
regards, dieter
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
