[ZWeb] zope web status report 2006-02-06

[Mark Pratt]

On Feb 9, 2006, at 11:22 AM, Martijn Faassen wrote:

> Mark Pratt wrote:
> [snip]
>>> If the idea is to deliver the message that Zope 3 is great,   
>>> clutting the message with Zope 2 cruft (not the same as if we  
>>> have  some really great zope 2 documentation, but what's there  
>>> has rotted  quite a bit) is not likely to help. Maybe we can (and  
>>> should) get  there too, but let's not bite off more than we can  
>>> chew the first  iteration. The *worst* thing we can do is launch  
>>> a new site that  has all the old sites' problems. :)
>> As attractive the idea may be of everyone switching to Zope 3  
>> right  away -- it is essential that the thousands of Zope 2.x  
>> server out  their still receive some kind of documentation support.
>> So while it may be true that the documentation is out of date --  
>> this  should then be a priority to do a "final" update of the 2.x  
>> docs and  then focus on all things Zope 3.
>> Legacy Zope apps are going to be around for the next 3 to 10 years.
>
> I've tried to write the 'brochure' content of the new zope.org to  
> include both Zope 2 and Zope 3 in a coherent story. I think this  
> can be done - review the text already there. My idea is to deliver  
> the message that Zope is great. It comes in two flavors and they're  
> both great.
>
> Besides brochure-style information, I'm less confident about  
> presenting up to date documentation on Zope 2, however. If we get  
> people to edit the Zope 2 documentation for inclusion, then I'm all  
> for it. I have my doubts that we'll get enough community interest  
> in doing so however, but I'd love to be wrong about that.
>
> The resulting website will depend on whether we get people do the  
> editing necessary.

In my experience quality editing (because its tedious) is not  
something that community work excels at.
Is this something that we should try to collect money for? (To then  
pay an experienced editor to go through the text).

Cheers,

Mark