[ZWeb] Q: Available for participation?

[Paul Everitt]

IMO, the two biggest issues with building your own sandbox are the LDAP
setup and the migration script, which laboriously flails at putting
existing www.zope.org content into your zope.  In fact, right now it is
broken (which is why 15080 doesn't have any content.)

I'm not advocating abandoning CVS.  I'm saying that everyone having a
separate CVS is quite a pain in the butt.

A lot can be done with skin access through the web.  A lot can also be
done by testing stuff with a generic CMF.

--Paul

On Mon, 2002-04-22 at 08:18, seb bacon wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-04-22 at 12:17, Paul Everitt wrote:
> > It is completely unrealistic at this point to get a sandbox working.  It 
> > would take too much of our time coaching someone and too much time and 
> > frustration on their part.
> 
> I've already checked out a sandbox and I've got it all running apart
> from the LDAP connection.  Is there much more beyond this that needs
> doing?  If not, I don't see that there would be that much frustration. 
> By not using CVS we'd be opening ourselves up to a whole raft of other
> frustrations, IMO.
> 
> Or is the problem that the current CVS does not represent the latest
> new.zope.org?
>  
> > IMO, it is much more realistic to simply give selected people (those 
> > that are committed to heavy participation) shell access to a debug area 
> > we create.
> 
> I'm happy to take whatever development process you advocate in the
> interests of getting moving, but I wanted to register my concern that
> this way of working may cause more problems than it solves.
> 
> If we're just concentrating on skin issues at the moment, then this is
> not such a problem.-
> 
> seb
>