Alan, I was aware of the restructuring document, but it doesn't say anything about genunix. I thought it was implied that we would be getting rid of genunix.
genunix, as far as I can tell, was required because the OpenSolaris site didn't provide wiki-based authoring. With the new OpenSolaris portal, this will no longer be a limitation. The entire OpenSolaris portal should be a collaborative space that anyone can edit who has a login. However, we need to provide the capability for leaders and moderators to lock-down or restrict editing privileges where appropriate....and set up specific project areas as you mentioned. This can be accomplished with rich role-based authentication. The "secure and controlled" requirement should be met by the portal software, not by splintering off the community into two separate sites. Paul Alan Burlison wrote: > Paul Kasper wrote: > >> I'm not sure that is understood by everyone. I certainly >> didn't understand that distinction. > > It's called out in the restructuring document > (http://auth.opensolaris.org/restructuring.html) and it has been > discussed on this list - but I guess if people haven't been following > the process from the beginning they wouldn't necessarily be aware of > that, hence I thought clarification was probably in order. > >> And, I guess I don't understand the difference between >> using the wiki for the portal and using it for "general >> purpose" needs. I don't see how these deliverables >> are different? > > The portal is to provide a secure, controlled and therefore trustworthy > place for communities to provide information, and it is based around > providing separate areas for each CG/Project/UG whatever. Contrast that > with genunix, which is a collaborative space that anyone can edit. The > two are quite different. > >> If we roll out the new portal and it does not replace >> genunix, then I think we fail. > > We can only be classified as failing if we set a goal that we don't > achieve. Replacing genunix was never a goal, therefore I'm afraid I > have to reject that characterisation. > >> To increase collaboration >> and ease of use, we must provide users a consistent >> way to produce information, which includes portal >> pages, project pages, and "documentation" pages. >> I don't think users see documentation as a different >> part of the portal...it should be integrated into >> the portal. > > There's a big difference between the current portal content and (for > example) content on docs.sun.com or bigadmin. We aren't trying to > replace those systems - we don't have the remit to do so, let alone the > necessary resources. > _______________________________________________ website-discuss mailing list [email protected]
