On 11/08/2010 08:51 PM, Nic Carter wrote:
> the good thing about it is that we can make one promote the various
> front-ends and the other can promote dev/module making? However, I
> think we need a better way of switching between the 2 than Mozilla
> do.
A link to the wiki from http://crosswire
On 09/11/2010, at 10:38 AM, Peter von Kaehne wrote:
> So
> we really need consensus at least at the core developers/contributors
> level.
My opinion about all of this is that I like the way Mozilla do this:
mozilla.org is for the community/developers and mozilla.com is for end-users.
Ignore
DM Smith wrote:
> We still have duplication. I think we should remove the duplicates,
> retaining the copy in the wiki. Also, the wiki needs to be more
> prominent for developers to find.
True
> Regarding the FAQ. It was felt that the FAQ would be maintained on
> the wiki with a static copy in t
Late comment to the thread:
Recently, there were two efforts to cleanup the website. Both, IMHO, were good
as far as they went.
These two related to the wiki and the front page of the website. It was agreed
that the front page should face users of CrossWire Bible Software. And that the
wiki wa
Several attempts to answer got swallowed by some problem in my
webmail. Now back home a last attempt...
"Troy A. Griffitts" wrote:
> Sure I agree our website needs updating, but a CMS doesn't magically
> update and bring accord to our website.
No. I would agree. But a well thought through plan
On 11/8/2010 1:17 AM, Caleb Maclennan wrote:
Chris you mention the issue of balancing devel news / nightly snapshot
type updates and releases that the public aught to be informed about.
I realize this is an issue, but it was pointed out just last week on
this list that the information for diata
Sure I agree our website needs updating, but a CMS doesn't magically
update and bring accord to our website.
We have had a long and notorious history of complaint about our website.
Someone goes off and reorganizes it the way they think it should be
(about once every 5 years or so) and then we st
All,
My first impression, albeit a few years ago, was the same thing. I found it
particularly hard to find my way around things. By chance I managed to
stumble across the Jira instance, but then lost it again when I was wanting
to see how much activity was happening. So whether a CMS or some other
Troy and Chris et all,
I cannot speak for what David felt as the exact problem, but I can
tell you why I jumped in with a comment. Troy it's hard to come up
with a specific example because the problem might be best described as
general discombobulation. The main crosswire site and the sword sub
si
I agree with Chris on this issue. CMS has been a debated topic in the past.
>From my conservative position, you must give a specific, real world
problem we currently have which is not easily solved with our current
infrastructure, or a real world benefit we are currently lacking because
we do not
On 11/6/2010 3:49 AM, David Haslam wrote:
We have an ftpmirror that does not keep track of updates to scripts and
other software tools that we host.
What you're referring to here (linking directly to the SVN versions of
perl scripts that we maintain) would be akin to replacing every single
I agree that this is a serious shortcoming of the overall project.
I would be willing to pitch in some experience in this area. If the
interested and or responsible parties would like perhaps we can get a
discussion going. Depending on the direction I may be willing to lend
a hand with coding and
No doubt this topic may have been discussed in the past, but even with my
limited experiences of IT, it seems to be the case that CrossWire lacks an
overall Content Management System.
Far too much of what we do is ad hoc and the result is that links in the
wiki pages as well as the main website s
13 matches
Mail list logo
