[Plone-conference] Why nuke the 2014 site?

Chris Calloway 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
> conference.
> 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
(919) 599-3530

More information about the Plone-conference mailing list