Just wanted to follow up with SAC in response to the website committee being dissolved.
While we will wait for a new board to be formed before figuring out what to do I would like to start a thread here on what kind effort the website has been for SAC to maintain and any other ideas for what is needed on the infrastructure side.
–
Jody Garnett
One idea I had was to reach out to the marketing committee for website LnF and content, and the system admin committee to run/update/manage the software. I kind of feel like SAC is already taken on the run/manage role, not sure how much work an update would be.
On 4 October 2016 at 15:01, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett@gmail.com> wrote:
Just wanted to follow up with SAC in response to the website committee being dissolved.
While we will wait for a new board to be formed before figuring out what to do I would like to start a thread here on what kind effort the website has been for SAC to maintain and any other ideas for what is needed on the infrastructure side.
–
Jody Garnett
–
Jody Garnett
On 10/07/2016 05:22 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
One idea I had was to reach out to the marketing committee for website LnF
and content, and the system admin committee to run/update/manage the
software. I kind of feel like SAC is already taken on the run/manage role,
not sure how much work an update would be.
There are several threads regarding this many years back. It was not a simple Drupal upgrade, do to previous customizations. The service provider directory needs to be rewritten (I think this should be standalone anyways), and the translations need to be migrated to a newer data structure.
Then there's the eternal struggle with theming...
SAC's historic role has been to ensure the software runs, not to handle any of the content, theming, or functionality.
Thanks,
Alex
Understood about the historic role, which is why I am bring it up now?
For example if an update is worthwhile (suppose it is eventually) would SAC be willing to put up a RFP (to cover the issues you raised above?) or is the kind of thing you would like the board to do?
On 7 October 2016 at 17:33, Alex Mandel <tech_dev@wildintellect.com> wrote:
On 10/07/2016 05:22 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
One idea I had was to reach out to the marketing committee for website LnF
and content, and the system admin committee to run/update/manage the
software. I kind of feel like SAC is already taken on the run/manage role,
not sure how much work an update would be.There are several threads regarding this many years back. It was not a simple Drupal upgrade, do to previous customizations. The service provider directory needs to be rewritten (I think this should be standalone anyways), and the translations need to be migrated to a newer data structure.
Then there’s the eternal struggle with theming…
SAC’s historic role has been to ensure the software runs, not to handle any of the content, theming, or functionality.
Thanks,
Alex
Sac mailing list
Sac@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/sac
–
Jody Garnett
Jody Garnett wrote:
For example if an update is worthwhile (suppose it is eventually) would SAC
be willing to put up a RFP (to cover the issues you raised above?) or is
the kind of thing you would like the board to do?
Some time ago I've been dealing with upgrading parts of the Drupal
instance and I managed to circumvent what I considered being all the
relevant issues - until people complained about the missing service
provider directory 
The site still runs Drupal5 on PHP 5.2, current version is Drupal8.
There *is* a migration path but it'll most certainly drop some pieces
of the site here and there. I'd offer to perform migration of the
core, most of our website and fix as many issues as possible, but I'm
unable to care about every little detail - because I'm no Drupal expert
and my time doesn't permit reaching that level.
We could set up the new site on a different machine and find someone
who'd be willing to walk the old and the new site and note the
differences. This would match website/marketing committee's role, I
think.
Just a suggestion, let me know what you think about it.
Cheers,
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Personally I like the idea, however … the website content is in many cases very dated. As an alternative (if you were setting up a new machine) interested parties (more likely a work party then just the marketing committee) may be interested in a fresh start (migrating/updating content to a new server).
On 10 October 2016 at 09:03, Martin Spott <Martin.Spott@mgras.net> wrote:
Jody Garnett wrote:
For example if an update is worthwhile (suppose it is eventually) would SAC
be willing to put up a RFP (to cover the issues you raised above?) or is
the kind of thing you would like the board to do?Some time ago I’ve been dealing with upgrading parts of the Drupal
instance and I managed to circumvent what I considered being all the
relevant issues - until people complained about the missing service
provider directoryThe site still runs Drupal5 on PHP 5.2, current version is Drupal8.
There is a migration path but it’ll most certainly drop some pieces
of the site here and there. I’d offer to perform migration of the
core, most of our website and fix as many issues as possible, but I’m
unable to care about every little detail - because I’m no Drupal expert
and my time doesn’t permit reaching that level.We could set up the new site on a different machine and find someone
who’d be willing to walk the old and the new site and note the
differences. This would match website/marketing committee’s role, I
think.Just a suggestion, let me know what you think about it.
Cheers,
Martin.Unix IS user friendly - it’s just selective about who its friends are !
Sac mailing list
Sac@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/sac
–
Jody Garnett
Hi Jody, Martin,
I'd like to help getting setup on the new Drupal. I'll file a ticket now to at least ask for that new machine with new Drupal, and interested people can help out. Once we get that set up I'll send invites for help to Discuss and the Marketing Committee; is this a good plan of attack?
(indeed a refreshed Service Providers tool will be done through teamwork, and will be a great addition for the foundation)
-jeff
On 2016-10-16 11:24 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
Personally I like the idea, however ... the website content is in many
cases very dated. As an alternative (if you were setting up a new
machine) interested parties (more likely a work party then just the
marketing committee) may be interested in a fresh start
(migrating/updating content to a new server).--
Jody GarnettOn 10 October 2016 at 09:03, Martin Spott <Martin.Spott@mgras.net
<mailto:Martin.Spott@mgras.net>> wrote:Jody Garnett wrote:
> For example if an update is worthwhile (suppose it is eventually) would SAC
> be willing to put up a RFP (to cover the issues you raised above?) or is
> the kind of thing you would like the board to do?Some time ago I've been dealing with upgrading parts of the Drupal
instance and I managed to circumvent what I considered being all the
relevant issues - until people complained about the missing service
provider directoryThe site still runs Drupal5 on PHP 5.2, current version is Drupal8.
There *is* a migration path but it'll most certainly drop some pieces
of the site here and there. I'd offer to perform migration of the
core, most of our website and fix as many issues as possible, but I'm
unable to care about every little detail - because I'm no Drupal expert
and my time doesn't permit reaching that level.We could set up the new site on a different machine and find someone
who'd be willing to walk the old and the new site and note the
differences. This would match website/marketing committee's role, I
think.Just a suggestion, let me know what you think about it.
Cheers,
Martin.
--
Hi Jody, Martin, I have created a ticket to track these next steps: https://trac.osgeo.org/osgeo/ticket/1805
-jeff
On 2016-10-16 11:24 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
Personally I like the idea, however ... the website content is in many
cases very dated. As an alternative (if you were setting up a new
machine) interested parties (more likely a work party then just the
marketing committee) may be interested in a fresh start
(migrating/updating content to a new server).--
Jody GarnettOn 10 October 2016 at 09:03, Martin Spott <Martin.Spott@mgras.net
<mailto:Martin.Spott@mgras.net>> wrote:Jody Garnett wrote:
> For example if an update is worthwhile (suppose it is eventually) would SAC
> be willing to put up a RFP (to cover the issues you raised above?) or is
> the kind of thing you would like the board to do?Some time ago I've been dealing with upgrading parts of the Drupal
instance and I managed to circumvent what I considered being all the
relevant issues - until people complained about the missing service
provider directoryThe site still runs Drupal5 on PHP 5.2, current version is Drupal8.
There *is* a migration path but it'll most certainly drop some pieces
of the site here and there. I'd offer to perform migration of the
core, most of our website and fix as many issues as possible, but I'm
unable to care about every little detail - because I'm no Drupal expert
and my time doesn't permit reaching that level.We could set up the new site on a different machine and find someone
who'd be willing to walk the old and the new site and note the
differences. This would match website/marketing committee's role, I
think.Just a suggestion, let me know what you think about it.
Cheers,
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends
are !