Re: [gentoo-dev] Attracting developers (Re: Packages up for grabs...)

[Roy Bamford]

On 2013.01.05 05:47, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 10:43 Mon 17 Dec , Markos Chandras wrote:
> > On 16 December 2012 18:53, Andreas K. Huettel 
> 
> wrote:
> > > How to do this, however, and what software to target should
> probably 
> > > be decided by people who know more than me... and in the end it
> all 
> > > boils down to "who has the time and motivation".
> > 
> > Outsource it to someone who has the knowledge and interest in doing 
> > this. The foundation has the funds to support it, and none of us 
> > actually have the time to invest in a complete webpage redesign.
> 
> I did much of the design work nearly 2 years ago:
> 
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~dberkholz/gentoo_website/
> gentoo_landing_black.png
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~dberkholz/gentoo_website/
> gentoo_landing_install.png
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~dberkholz/gentoo_website/
> gentoo_landing_handbook.png
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~dberkholz/gentoo_website/
> gentoo_landing_handbook2.png
> 
> Some early work on it using Bootstrap:
> 
> http://a3li.li/~alex/g.o/
> 
> That said, why the hell are we wasting time implementing our own
> website 
> backend when we should be using a CMS? We're here to make a distro,
> not 
> a website framework. No reason we should care, day to day, about 
> anything but frontend theming and content.
> 
> -- 
> Thanks,
> Donnie
> 
> Donnie Berkholz
> Council Member / Sr. Developer, Gentoo Linux 
> Analyst, RedMonk 
> 
Donnie.

We make our own website framework for the same reason that everything 
else happens in Gentoo.  Someone is interested in doing it.

I agree its not 'core business' but Gentoo isn't a business.

-- 

Regards,

Roy Bamford
(Neddyseagoon) a member of
elections
gentoo-ops
forum-mods
trustees


pgpdIQacGgwHH.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Attracting developers (Re: Packages up for grabs...)

[Andreas K. Huettel]

Am Samstag, 5. Januar 2013, 16:46:07 schrieb Roy Bamford:

> > That said, why the hell are we wasting time implementing our own
> > website
> > backend when we should be using a CMS? We're here to make a distro,
> > not
> > a website framework. No reason we should care, day to day, about
> > anything but frontend theming and content.
> 
> Donnie.
> 
> We make our own website framework for the same reason that everything
> else happens in Gentoo.  Someone is interested in doing it.
> 
> I agree its not 'core business' but Gentoo isn't a business.

Even if you're not a business you should care about maintainable solutions.

-- 
Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer 
dilfri...@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Attracting developers (Re: Packages up for grabs...)

[Alec Warner]

On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Andreas K. Huettel  wrote:
> Am Samstag, 5. Januar 2013, 16:46:07 schrieb Roy Bamford:
>
>> > That said, why the hell are we wasting time implementing our own
>> > website
>> > backend when we should be using a CMS? We're here to make a distro,
>> > not
>> > a website framework. No reason we should care, day to day, about
>> > anything but frontend theming and content.
>>
>> Donnie.
>>
>> We make our own website framework for the same reason that everything
>> else happens in Gentoo.  Someone is interested in doing it.
>>
>> I agree its not 'core business' but Gentoo isn't a business.
>
> Even if you're not a business you should care about maintainable solutions.

I'm sure at the time it was created (12+ years ago) the website looked
pretty maintainable :)

-A

>
> --
> Andreas K. Huettel
> Gentoo Linux developer
> dilfri...@gentoo.org
> http://www.akhuettel.de/

Re: [gentoo-dev] Attracting developers (Re: Packages up for grabs...)

[Rich Freeman]

On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Alec Warner  wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Andreas K. Huettel  
> wrote:
>> Even if you're not a business you should care about maintainable solutions.
>
> I'm sure at the time it was created (12+ years ago) the website looked
> pretty maintainable :)

Hence the reason we should strongly consider a mainstream CMS.

I don't have a problem with somebody wanting to spend a lot of time
making something fancy for us - we're all volunteers.  The problem is
that the satisfaction of having built something new and shiny tends to
wear off, and then it ends up having to be maintained by people who
could care less how fancy the engine behind it is.

Rich

Re: [gentoo-dev] Attracting developers (Re: Packages up for grabs...)

[Donnie Berkholz]

On 18:03 Sat 05 Jan , Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> Am Samstag, 5. Januar 2013, 16:46:07 schrieb Roy Bamford:
> > I agree its not 'core business' but Gentoo isn't a business.
> 
> Even if you're not a business you should care about maintainable solutions.

More importantly, even if you aren't a business (although we are, 
technically, albeit a not-for-profit one), you should still have a 
mission that you're focused on accomplishing. Otherwise you can justify 
anything in the context of Gentoo, when in reality we need to limit our 
scope to increase our impact.

I actually suspect this is a byproduct of Gentoo being many 
contributors' first OSS development experiences. They're nervous to 
branch out on their own w/ e.g. a GitHub repo so they initiate 
*everything* under the Gentoo umbrella.

I would argue that defining a clear vision and audience for Gentoo would 
significantly increase our ability to get useful things done.

-- 
Thanks,
Donnie

Donnie Berkholz
Council Member / Sr. Developer, Gentoo Linux 
Analyst, RedMonk 


pgpzBhWAtbiqb.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] About using a CONFIGURATION (or SETUP) file under /usr/share/doc for configuration information

[William Hubbs]

On Fri, Jan 04, 2013 at 11:34:59PM -0600, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 10:26 Sat 22 Dec , Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > Hello
> > 
> > After seeing:
> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=440214
> > 
> > Looking to a lot of its blockers shows that we are using "elog" messages
> > for informing people about configuration (like pointing people to
> > external links to get proper way of configuring things, tell them to add
> > to some system groups...). I thought that maybe this kind of information
> > could be simply included in a canonical file under /usr/share/doc/
> > package dir called, for example, CONFIGURATION or SETUP. We would them
> > point people (now with a news item, for the long term provably a note to
> > handbook to newcomers would be nice) to that file to configure their
> > setups. The main advantages I see:
> > - We will flood less summary.log ;)
> > - The information to configure the package is always present while
> > package is installed, now, if we remove merge produced logs, people will
> > need to reemerge the package or read directly the ebuild
> > 
> > What do you think?
> 
> Bikeshedding ... would go with README.gentoo, because people are already 
> used to looking for README files. Every time we can eliminate 
> Gentoo-specific weirdness, we should.

Thinking about this, I tend to agree.  That way we can put the README
file in ${FILESDIR} and change it whenever we need to for different
versions of the package.

William

> 
> -- 
> Thanks,
> Donnie
> 
> Donnie Berkholz
> Council Member / Sr. Developer, Gentoo Linux 
> Analyst, RedMonk 




pgpruzYrr009F.pgp
Description: PGP signature