[Squeakfoundation]consolidating squeak web presence
Simon Michael
squeakfoundation@lists.squeakfoundation.org
29 May 2001 10:40:10 -0700
Dear squeak swiki & squeak.org webmasters,
the squeak wiki has done long service at minnow.cc.gatech.edu. I think
there is some consensus that the time has now come to locate it within
the squeak.org domain, eg as swiki.squeak.org. See my comments below
for a little context.
Do you agree, are you available to help, any ideas on how to make this
happen ? We don't know if it requires a physical move or can be done
virtually.
Thanks,
-Simon
PS the squeak foundation list archives are at
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation
"Joshua 'Schwa' Gargus" <schwa@cc.gatech.edu> writes:
> On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 07:27:15PM -0700, Simon Michael wrote:
> > Andreas - yes. Just a little more prevarication from me: ok, where can
> > I help plant this stake in the ground.. which leads us back to..
> >
> > ..the squeak wiki. IMHO this is the optimal place for constructing
> > these lists, because (a) they probably partially exist there already
> > and (b) ease of linking to more detail. Two problems -
> >
> > 1. <poke, prod> with no disrespect intended, the current admin(s) are
> > not delivering uptime. 9 outages so far this month, including some of
> > more than a day (according to
> > http://uptime.arsdigita.com/uptime/reports.tcl?monitor_id=119512 ). I
> > know "there'll be a server upgrade next week". But in any case,
>
> Don't worry. There'll be a server upgrade next week ;-)
>
> Them's the breaks with running a research lab within a large bureaucratic
> organization; we can't order the machines directly to us. This isn't
> something that urgently needs to be solved immediately, and it isn't
> something that we can speed up. Just hang tight for a little bit.
>
> > 2. the wiki is at some strange url, neither squeak.org,
> > squeakfoundation.org, nor squeakland.org. This dilutes squeak's web
> > presence.
>
> I think that this is a very good point. What the heck is
> minnow.cc.gatech.edu anyway? However, this is a historical accident
> as a result of the fact that the Squeak Swiki started off as an
> experiment back in the (relative) infancy of Swiki. If you think
> that it is important enough to address immediately, the author and
> current maintainer is Je77 Rick. You can contact him at
> nadja@cc.gatech.edu; I'm sure he'll be glad to talk to you about
> the possibility of moving the Swiki out of .gatech.edu.
>
> Tell him Schwa sent you ;-)
>
> > True, this doesn't actually prevent me from building Andreas' lists
> > but I only have 15 minutes and I'd like to see it solved. I'd prefer a
> > single, stable, canonical community wiki. I'm tempted to propose
> > doing the simplest thing that could possibly work: mirror it on
> > squeakfoundation.org and forget minnow.
> >
> > Minnow admin(s) are you on this list ? Comments anyone ?
>
> Oops, didn't read this far. AFAIK, I'm the only GaTech Squeaker on
> this list. But Je77's contact information is above.
>
> Joshua
>
> > Best regards - Simon
Simon Michael <simon@joyful.com> writes:
> Paul Fernhout <pdfernhout@kurtz-fernhout.com> writes:
> > With the exception of the mini-faq, one question to think about is why
> > haven't these consolidation and organization projects happened already?
>
> Excellent question. I can speak for myself:
>
> > There are also several Wikis where this sort of effort could be
> > happening
>
> you've hit the nail on the head :).
>
> In other words: each time I've entered the squeak community (maybe
> three times over the last 3-4 years) I (a) came to the conclusion the
> sorts of things you describe are where I can best help and (b) looked
> at the web presence and fora for documentation and got scared away by
> the feeling of shifting sands and multiplicity. No-one wants to spend
> time on documentation that may or may found.
>
> You can make a case that I allowed myself to be scared off from hard
> work too easily.. but my point is that this has probably happened with
> plenty of other potential contributors. We want the threshold for
> contribution to approach zero. Hence my last post.
>
> -Simon