MadFish wrote:
Quote:

Good suggestions, but a big job to post to all of them.

Is any one of the above list the most "logical" choice were there to be a single nominated posting point?

Or is just one posting-point a little idealistic?

Why not set up a XOOPS security email list that people can subscribe to? Not only could it be used to provide timely security patch announcements, it could also be used to advise users of xoops.org downtime and similar issues. Ideally should not be on the same server, of course.

It should be trivial to set up, inexpensive to run and provides the single launch point for the admins. If its opt-in there'd probably only be a few thousand users max, so bandwidth would not be onerous. People that care can subscribe to it, and people that don't won't have many grounds to complain about being uninformed.

Dave, I don't think your comments were entirely fair. The perpetual flame wars are a symptom of a problem, not the cause. Get the teams set up, give them access to the tools and authority they need to do their job, let people who want to participate do so, and provide some kind of mechanism to interface the community with the management. And then let it run.

Trying to run the project from the top down is a mistake. It hasn't worked before, its not going to work now. No offense intended to anybody, its just what I think.

BlueStocking wrote:
@SailJapan,
Sure, I apolize;
that was rude of me...
I didn't realize I was doing that.

Long links I mean....
Sorry!!!

BlueStocking wrote:
Sept 13th, 2007

_____________
davidl2 << A+++
http://xoopsinfo.com/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=42

Very good.
Thanks

No one is arguing having a closed repository is a bad thing, we only are wondering about the change in protocol and lack of direction that brought about this change.

Peekay wrote:
Quote:

seth_sd wrote:
... Not that posting around here makes you smart but it seems like you would choose someone that is committed to the community,garnered its respect, knows how to communicate with it and has been around for awhile.

Another good reason not to re-register in a new forum. Otherwise we're all back to the status of 'just popping in'.

sailjapan wrote:
Pretty close, Darcy. This thread is step 5 and will remain open until Sunday. Thence 5.5 (summarization and drafting of 'the plan').
Trouble is, I can't find any one with the necessary rights/authority to make the steps 1~5 a step 6 reality.

I'll say this again (though my face may be showing a tinge of blue by now)

Which committee is charged with making the changes?
Who has the authority to alter the code of x.o site?
Who has the ability to action the same?


You know what? I can type these questions with my eyes closed I've asked it so often.

Crip

The Technical group has invited two server administrators, jdseymour and Mr Xiao LI. Both are excellent additions to the Technical group, and are handling the migration of XOOPS.org and dev.XOOPS.org to the new servers.

BlueStocking wrote:
Quote:

So why not get going with xoopsinfo.org being called - forums.xoops.org. Make the appropriate links on the front page of xoops.org, integrate the user database and add the additional search capabilities that would allow this to come together. Then move on to the next project which maybe docs or wiki or whatever. The organization owns the hardware and the domain name even though it will no longer be relevant once it's "forums.xoops.org". It's all in place and paid for - use it!

At Forums.xoops.org I can post on any form I can read.

At xoopsinfo.com if I want to comment to a person regarding a post I have to pm them -- That is true with anyone else who isn't in the approved circle.

To put it mildly, I resent this.

...darcy

davidl2 wrote:
Some sensible reasoning there.