#3104: geoserver-users SF mailman to discourse?
----------------------+----------------------------------------
Reporter: jive | Owner: sac-tickets@…
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: normal | Milestone: Sysadmin Contract 2024-II
Component: SysAdmin | Resolution:
Keywords: |
----------------------+----------------------------------------
Comment (by robe):
Replying to [comment:16 jive]:
> Thanks for experimenting with category names, advise what to do and I
will update the geoserver and geonetwork planning accordingly.
>
> * option top-level minimal: `geoserver` / `user`
> * option top-level redundant: `geoserver` / `geoserver-user`
> * option nested minimal: `project` / `geoserver` / `user`
> * option nested redundant: `osgeo project` / `geoserver` / `geoserver-
user`
>
I'd start with the short version as you stated. I'm still feeling iffy
about burying projects under project as that affects more than geoserver
and QGIS main listings are planning to be coming on board in the next
month or 2.
I feel like for now we should go with:
* option top-level minimal: `geoserver` / `user`
and move one level down after further discussions with all project
stakeholders, which right now is just
QGIS, geoserver, and pgrouting
One thing I did notice as another consequence of going 3 levels, is the
description on the home page only shows for the uppest parent level even
if subparents have descriptions. I haven't investigated if there is a fix
for that.
Like if you look at SAC sub category, it has no description showing on
homepage though it does have a description.
So we might loose that for pgRouting and QGIS, their descriptions if they
are buried one level down in a project folder.
I also haven't investigated other ways for organizing the home page like
custom plugins etc. I think there might be many more we haven't
considered. Right now we are using the categories page like a lazy
homepage. It would be great if someone could take on that work to figure
out our options, cause I'd rather focus on system administration than UI
look and feel which I know I suck at.
> I made an export of the mbox yesterday ...resulting in a 1.3G text file.
What is the best way to provide that to you?
>
If it's the same format as you gave @cvvergara last time, it should work.
I think she was able to make sense of the part obfuscated email addresses.
I'll leave it up to her to respond.
> Notes:
> - I tend to prefer singular (`project`,`user`) rather than plural
(`projects`, `users`)
> - We may of already lost any hope of consistency, can categories be
renamed?
Yes as mentioned categories can be renamed easily cause internally
discourse just works on category id numbers.
In fact I think Vicky has to in order to load the mailing lists, put them
on the root and then rename them and move them down the category hierarchy
where they belong cause the mbox importer uses the mbox to arrive at the
name.
However if you start with one name and decide to change later, I think we
might need to put redirects in (which I recall there being a page for that
within discourse) so that if people
were navigating via the UI, they will be redirected to the new location.
--
Ticket URL: <#3104 (geoserver-users SF mailman to discourse?) – OSGeo;
OSGeo <Gter - OSGeo;
OSGeo committee and general foundation issue tracker.