[Plone-conference] Why nuke the 2014 site?

nguyen at plone.org nguyen at plone.org
Thu Sep 24 19:37:06 UTC 2015

It would be good to have the site infrastructure already in place, with a basic set of add-ons, so that:

- conference organizers don’t need to spend time with DNS, servers, buildout, stack setup, etc. - they can just start using a subsite or a new site in the existing and maintained buildout

- conference organizers don’t need to spend time or remember to transfer / export / copy their site into an alternative archive

- there is a progressively improving (perhaps slowly improving, mind you) pragmatic “best practice” for Plone event web site setup

Think of it as SaaS for Plone event web sites…

Speaking as a past and prospective event organizer, I would be happier with this than with either side of having to export my sites into a flat archive, which has severe issues in terms of Plone marketing (how bad does it look if we have that as our annual community highlight record?).


> On Sep 24, 2015, at 2:30 PM, Chris Calloway <cbc at unc.edu> wrote:
> 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.
> -- 
> Sincerely,
> Chris Calloway, Applications Analyst
> UNC Renaissance Computing Institute
> 100 Europa Drive, Suite 540, Chapel Hill, NC 27517
> (919) 599-3530
> _______________________________________________
> Plone-conference mailing list
> Plone-conference at lists.plone.org <mailto:Plone-conference at lists.plone.org>
> http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/plone-conference <http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/plone-conference>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plone.org/pipermail/plone-conference/attachments/20150924/1f45d778/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Plone-conference mailing list