Martijn Dashorst wrote:
All,
What is the future of our website in relation to content management?
With that I mean do we:
1 - continue generating our sites using maven, and put them on Apache turf
2 - use confluence and export it into some static format and put them
on Apache turf
3 - use joomla and export it into some static format and put them on
Apache turf
4 - use joomla and host it on our servoy server, and use that as our
main site (forward from wicket.apache.org)?
5 - some other option?
How does Apache look at option 4? Is it just frowned upon, is it
something that is explicitly forbidden in the policies/bylaws/rules?
Does it conflict with ownership of domains and brand names of Apache)?
The problem we face and many Apache projects imho is that the sites
are rarely updated with new info and documentation. Having a static
site and some elaborate means to update the front page/site, is
preventing people from adding content to the site. We have experienced
that first hand with our current Wicket setup.
This is an issue as we have to decide what to do with the site design
Vincent came up with. And of course since we need some web presence in
the future.
Options 1 and 2 are straight-forward within Apache.
Option 3 would be possible, although you would be better asking for
wicket.zones.apache.org (a Solaris zone) and running Joomla there - so
that the source content is stored on Apache hardware.
Option 4 would be difficult - remember that documentation is also part
of the IP that we are creating at Apache, so it needs to be hosted on
ASF hardware. Doing option 4 would almost certainly cause difficulties
upon an attempt to graduate.
As to the issues of infrequent updates - Apache folks are well aware of
those issues, even if they haven't come up with a conclusive answer yet.
Make sense?
Upayavira
