Andreas Jung wrote:

See this thread:

http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-web/2009-January/thread.html

Shame, oh well, I think dictatorship is the way to go and I think you'd make a pretty good dictator, so go for it :-) Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk

Chris Withers wrote:

Andreas Jung wrote:

...

because of the failure of the new.zope.org project I would like to put the hat on for reorganizing the Zope 2 presentation on zope.org.

Is this failure official or is there just no action on this?

Let's say both. I basically gave up trying to get volunteers to provide content, and the timings conspired so that I didn't have time to do any more of it myself. We still have a Plone 3 theme, a visual design, and a server. If someone wants to pick this up, I'd love to see it happen. I'd even contribute. But I came to the conclusion that virtually no-one cares enough (or can prioritise this highly enough) to actually provide any content. Perhaps Andreas is changing that now, though. Martin -- Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 21.02.2009 5:09 Uhr, Martin Aspeli wrote:

I basically gave up trying to get volunteers to provide content, and the timings conspired so that I didn't have time to do any more of it myself. We still have a Plone 3 theme, a visual design, and a server. If someone wants to pick this up, I'd love to see it happen. I'd even contribute. But I came to the conclusion that virtually no-one cares enough (or can prioritise this highly enough) to actually provide any content. Perhaps Andreas is changing that now, though.

I started over with the microsite approach on my own server (for the development phase where I have things under my own control right now): http://zope2.zopyx.de Everyone is invited to actively participate (means: get an account and add content, update existing content etc.). The motto of this project is: getting things done by actually doing them. Concerning the look & feel: unless someone volunteers for taking over the responsibility for providing a Plone theme, I will step forward trying to coordinate this with the design efforts that are currently in progress for the relaunch of www.zope.de. I just want to point out that I don't proceed with this project single-handedly but it is now time gettings things done and any kind of active help will be highly appreciated. Regards, Andreas -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkmhTOcACgkQCJIWIbr9KYyktgCdE+4+eOwgA9i+rRSQX6tw2lVa VSYAoJo3LDt2VO2d+9pW+hGWTDi9jprQ =YdEo -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Andreas Jung wrote:

Everyone is invited to actively participate (means: get an account and add content

That needs a little more. First it's not clear how to get an account (currently, add /join_form to the url). Second, after submitting the join form I just got a login form and the account doesn't seem to be created.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 20.02.2009 15:23 Uhr, Martijn Faassen wrote:

I really hope someone provides the resources to create a microsite instead of "the Zope 3 approach on wiki.zope.org". Grok is doing two things: a Plone-based site where people can contribute documentation, and a Sphinx-based website for official documentation maintained in SVN.

The Zope 3 approach on wiki.zope.org is hardly a shining example of web presence for a web framework that's attractive to users. I'd say overall it's an anti-example (though it's has much improved compared to what it was before - as of quite recently it chased users away saying it was really a site for the developers of Zope 3). Hearing of plans to replicate its approach therefore worry me a little. :)

If there are volunteer for taking over the support for microsite approach, I am definitely +1. Othweise I will go with the wiki approach (basically because of time constraints). I hope someone steps forward for the task its life :-)

Anyway, overall I'm a big supporter of the "microsite" approach. It's the only approach that actually got us to new web sites over the last years.

*sigh* yes :-) Andreas -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkme2ncACgkQCJIWIbr9KYy0JACgtTTTS9RqVrEv9VmS6n3W6P5f L9cAoKmNbzbOKvOiKCRwGgYx1P++1pT0 =SeFG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 05:14, Martin Aspeli <optilude+lists@gmail.com> wrote:

The new.zope.org initiative died because no-one could write any content. Even then 5-10 pages of content requires for a very basic microsite was too much, and several separate calls for volunteers produced almost no actual content, even if several people showed an interest.

Where did you ask for volunteers? I don't remember seeing in on zope-web, but I could have missed it or just forgot. My attitude has always been, and is still: Build it and they will come. We don't need content, we need a site. Besides, the current state is, and has for a long time been, almost worse than having no site at all, and definitely worse than having a couple of microsites even if these have almost no content.

Another observation: the thing that most people seem to want to make a site about was the ZODB. We nearly had enough content for a ZODB microsite thanks to Christian Theune and a few others.

If there is one page, then that's enough. Hence, there should have been a zodb.zope.org by now. -- Lennart Regebro: Pythonista, Barista, Notsotrista. http://regebro.wordpress.com/ +33 661 58 14 64

On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 10:14, Martin Aspeli <optilude+lists@gmail.com> wrote:

Please go make this happen if you can. It's very important. I can't anymore.

As far as I can see, it's a question of - setting up a server, I would recommend a Plone site with the new Zope theme. - creating a zodb.zope.org DNS record and pointing it at that Zope site. - pasting in the content. - giving zodb people manager access to the plone site. I can not technically do any of that, as I don't have a server to put it on, no access to the Zope.org dns and no content. The rest I can do. :) -- Lennart Regebro: Pythonista, Barista, Notsotrista. http://regebro.wordpress.com/ +33 661 58 14 64

On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 11:59, Martin Aspeli <optilude+lists@gmail.com> wrote:

We

Yes. But not *I*. And you asked if *I* could get it done. :) Perhaps you meant if I could nag people into doing it. I doubt that I could. I'm not good at making people do things for free. :) I think the way your formulated this is indicative of the problems. It's a case of "Somebody is not working here". I.e. "This should be done" or "Somebody needs to do X". Well, there isn't anybody called Somebody here, so as long as "Somebody" needs to do it, it won't get done. :) This is one of the common obstacles of committee work, and it seems zope-web unfortunately got a dose of it. Maybe we are getting out of the slump thanks to Andreas, but if not I again suggest the Zope Foundation appoints a Web Tsar with full access to everything that gets completely free hands to do whatever he wants (after the foundation has taken a backup of everything) and see what happens. :) I'm also lazy, which are the reasons I haven't volunteered for the role of Web Tsar already, as being bad at getting people to work for free would mean I have to do everything myself, and I'm too lazy for that. :) -- Lennart Regebro: Pythonista, Barista, Notsotrista. http://regebro.wordpress.com/ +33 661 58 14 64

On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 14:11, Martin Aspeli <optilude+lists@gmail.com> wrote:

IMHO, the way the Zope community is structured, it's very hard to get people to contribute this kind of thing. I hope things are different now. The work that happened with the Zope book is encouraging, for example. However, most people who care enough about Zope to want the website to be better are too busy or too much into coding. Unlike, say, Rails, there isn't a large community of "fanboys" who want to contribute and have time on their hands and the right "soft" skills.

This is absolutely true. I'll put up "Zope.org" as a possible discussion item for the OpenSpace, maybe somebody has some bright idea. -- Lennart Regebro: Pythonista, Barista, Notsotrista. http://regebro.wordpress.com/ +33 661 58 14 64

Andreas Jung wrote:

I just checked new.zope.org and I think that your idea appears reasonable. The only thing I dislike about the new.zope.org design is the navigation tree at the bottom of the page. All other parts of the design could be re-used directly - perhaps with some slightly modifications.

Er... it's not supposed to be there. It wasn't there last time I looked - it was on the left. Seems to be some problem with the CSS.

Two questions: - - how can grant me access to the new.zope.org Plone site in order to look at the stuff and for playing around?

Check your mail. I've created you an account and made you Manager.

- - are there any legal issues with the design & layout in case we want to make modifications? I know that the designer of new.zope.org theme made some trouble when it came to discussion about the briefs and donouts on the new.zope.org frontpage.

I don't think he had any problems with changing them, but he wanted to have some oversight if we changed the design or re-used it elsewhere. Speak to Lovely Systems. Martin -- Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book

Jens Vagelpohl wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

On Feb 21, 2009, at 08:55 , Andreas Jung wrote:

...

- - are there any legal issues with the design & layout in case we want to make modifications? I know that the designer of new.zope.org theme made some trouble when it came to discussion about the briefs and donouts on the new.zope.org frontpage.

Yes there are. In essence, do not use the design, period.

Here are the reasons I had for voting against continuing new.zope.org:

- the design is not free and re-usable

- the designer has stopped providing any support for the design, and the person who found and tasked the designer with the design work, Jodok, has given up on the whole issue because he is frustrated as well

- the website structure and presentation is too Zope 3-centric. Zope2 is basically hidden away. IMHO this may reflect the original creators' thinking, but doesn't reflect the world out there, which still uses mainly Zope2.

- no one has given any thought to migration issues (old URLs will fail, zope.org users with login will complain that there is no login anymore)

The ZF board vote was to stop supporting the project on the current path. Everyone still wants to see a new zope.org site, but this particular project wasn't going anywhere anymore. Several project managers came, spent much effort trying to make it work, and left again. It's better to start with a clean slate, and maybe with a smaller set of goals.

I wasn't aware of this vote, but I'm happy to abide by it. I think they are sensible decisions. I also think that the Zope world and the role of Zope 3 and eggs and all that has changed in the last year to the point where some of the original vision (and the role of Grok etc) is not necessarily correct. Martin -- Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book

Simon Michael wrote:

Martijn Faassen wrote:

...

and a Sphinx-based website for official documentation maintained in SVN.

+1 of course,

...

Anyway, overall I'm a big supporter of the "microsite" approach. It's the only approach that actually got us to new web sites over the last years.

I must quibble: I agree with you, if by "microsite" you include the zope wikis. Those new web sites were deployed and answering real-world zope questions long before the others. :)

Sure, I'm not saying the wikis aren't useful. But they're not the same as a website either, unless the wiki is maintained very aggressively indeed (and historically at least the Zope 3 wiki wasn't, though I must say it's a lot better than it was). At least the Zope 3 web presence through the wiki was for a very long time quite absymal. Perhaps because there was *something* we didn't do enough to make it a proper presentation. Anyway, the Zope world's changing and it seems we're finally picking up momentum in presenting ourselves and documenting ourselves after a long period of lackluster activity. I think that's great! What's more, I actually have some hopes we'll see an actual Zope Framework website appear in the course of the coming year as well (where the Zope Framework is the framework bits in Zope 3). Regards, Martijn

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 21.02.2009 8:16 Uhr, Lennart Regebro wrote:

About wiki/vs microsite, I also would hope for a microsite. Wikis are good for community generated docs/howtos and stuff, which we already have for Zope2. And a pretty good one at that: http://wiki.zope.org/zope2/Zope2Wiki

After Martin's posting I will re-check if we can re-use something from the new.zope.org.

Also, there is alos now the Zope2Book and Zope Developers guide on docs.zope.org, looking good there.

Jup, and Hanno and I reST-ified the Z2 docs folder yesterday so we can use Sphinx for generating HTML/PDF.

But we do need a Zope2 overview site, that explains what it is and how to get started, and has links to all of the above places. I assume that's what you intend to create?

The first goal is bringing a site up in order to get people away from the old zope.org site and providing basic technical documentation etc. Since I am only an average technical write and definitely not a story-teller, I will focus on the technical stuff (in the hope people contributing pieces for the Zope 'evangelism' part of the site).

A similar site should be created for Zope 3, and then we should trash the current Zope org for a new frontpage that basically only points to the different microsites.

Basically yes. I don't think it is a good idea to recommend any particular Zope framework on the front-page. Instead each individual project should make clear its own focus and strength. Perhaps it is not the best approach for giving n00bs an answer to "wtf is Zope? What shall I use". So I agree that the front-page should be in some way neutral, not selling a particular Zope project but leading you directly to the different projects. This approach does not require much discussion and fighting between the individual projects and each project can represent itself. It is hard getting all the people under one hood - so the microsite approach looks reasonable for me. I think this worked out pretty well for grok.zope.org (which is really a useful site). Andreas - -- ZOPYX Ltd. & Co. KG - Charlottenstr. 37/1 - 72070 Tübingen - Germany Web: www.zopyx.com - Email: info@zopyx.com - Phone +49 - 7071 - 793376 Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, Handelsregister A 381535 Geschäftsführer/Gesellschafter: ZOPYX Limited, Birmingham, UK - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ E-Publishing, Python, Zope & Plone development, Consulting -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkmfrlQACgkQCJIWIbr9KYwqqQCgiHN7NZOydG7qLkeq+CrkxoTF mYcAnA1sFm2NVQQInMUOCl4m1pjYMabR =wEIO -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----