[theforum] Rebuild progress and this week's actions

[Martin Paul Burns]

Morgan wrote on 30/11/2004 19:19:02:

> Martin,
>
> > Dear all
> >
> > I've updated the project plan:
> >
http://wiki.evolt.org/index.php/Evolt.org_Rebuild_%282004%29/Project_Plan
> > with last week's progress, which was:
> >
> > 1) Agree site functions (No-one disagreed with my proposal)
>
> i'm not entirely comfortable with this "no one disagreed so therefore
it's a
> go" direction we're taking. in the past, these types of things have had
*a
> vote*, not a declaration. the aardvark declared his desire for belgian
> waffles (and fruit), is that too, therefore, "a go"?

We already agreed that we'd strive to drupalise evolt.org by the birthday.
We've already agreed the significant points of principle where votes are of
course essential. But my problem is: At what level do we stop having votes?
On every single line of code? Obviously not, but at some point we have to
move into operational mode, and I think that time is now.

I put forward a project plan that will deliver by 13 Dec, and proposals for
the high level functions and design and gave opportunity for
comment/disagreement on all 3 together with a deadline for doing so. Did I
boob by not putting 'vote' in the subjects?

> those of us that survive as freelancers are very busy during the holiday
> season with our client's demands,

You're not the only one - I have a significant deliverable due on the 17th.

> and may not have time to respond to every email.

Sorry, but if you're too busy, you have to let evolt.org get on without you
and trust the organisation's intelligence to do so. That's been the
evolt.org standard for a *long* time now, and in a volunteer organisation
is really the *only* way to deliver.

> have we agreed the URLs are to remain the same?
> (i believe we did last year some time)  has there been any progress on
> *that*?

Ah, now you're into the detailed requirements discussion. Fine. We've not
touched that level of detail yet. Bring it on. Make proposals.

> >
> > For this week, we need to:
> > 1) Prioritise requirements in detail and analyse against what we
already
> >   have as standard in drupal and built in the PoC
>
> so the PoC is now our new direction? i seem to have missed that vote too.
is
> there anyone else out there who has another idea for a PoC?

Nope, we're not going to do another PoC - we're doing the final site now.

However, we *can* discuss (and there has been discussion on #evolt) the
next level of detail: whether we just modify the PoC, take bits of it, or
start from fresh. Bring it on.

If you don't have irc access from where you are, let me know as I've got a
web-accessible client pointed at #evolt I can give you the URL of.

Note the PoC definition btw: http://wiki.evolt.org/index.php/Poc.evolt.org

> > 3) Start HTMLising the design
>
> this looks to me like a bigger problem than some of us may think.
> drupal seems to think that <div id="sumthin"><div
> id="sumthinelse">stuff</div></div> is good HTML/CSS. sure, it may
validate,
> but so does lots of other over-written garbage.

Detailed HTML design: bring it on!

> and please folks, i'm not trying to flame or throw a stick in the cogs,
just
> pointing out some things about the "new evolt" that seem pretty different

> from the "old evolt", and (in my eyes) aren't necessarily better.

And that input is really, really useful. I genuinely like people saying "We
can do better". Bring it on.

> i think we're off to a great start, and i applaud the hard work put in by

> martin, john, elfur and others, but i'm not excited about relaunching a
> sub-quality evolt (compared to the current version) just because its
"new".

The criterion is 'is it good enough to launch?' which may or may not have
reference to the existing site. With a packaged system, and a much larger
group of developers, it will undoubtably get much, much better than
whatever we launch with in the days, weeks and months following.

Cheers
Martin