[Plone-conference] Why nuke the 2014 site?
cbc at unc.edu
Thu Sep 24 19:30:33 UTC 2015
On 9/24/2015 2:31 PM, Fulvio Casali wrote:
> Just putting this idea out there: what if there was a new persistent
> team, the "ploneconf website development and infrastructure team"?
> The idea would be to take the ploneconf website responsibility out of
> the actual conference hosts' hands, which would be one less thing the
> organizers would have to worry about. The conference hosts would just
> provide a theme for the year (or leave it up to the hypothetical new
> team). This new team would have latitude to decide which features the
> site would have, based on requests and feedback received every year.
> They would also be free to decide how and what to archive after each
> I realize an idea is only worth as much as finding people to put in the
> work, but I was wondering what others think.
It's a very ambitious idea that I love. The old sites seems to disappear
when the former conference hosts get tired of providing the infrastructure.
An alternative could be a persistent infrastructure team that hosts
ploneconf sites which the conference hosts design, deploy, and operate.
There might be some constraints on deployment. Or the deployment might
be done by such an infrastructure team, ensuring some modicum of sanity
to the deployed sites.
In either case, the best of all worlds would be a Plone conference
hosting product upon which themes are dropped. The Django world has such
a product (Symposion) which they have inflicted upon the greater Python
conference world to great pain. I would be great to have a Plone
alternative that actually worked, has feature complete behavior, and
isn't some kind of giant hogweed of warts to maintain.
Chris Calloway, Applications Analyst
UNC Renaissance Computing Institute
100 Europa Drive, Suite 540, Chapel Hill, NC 27517
More information about the Plone-conference