On Monday 24 July 2006 11:07, Greg DeKoenigsberg <gdk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > /me is still a bit uncertain about the goals of the plone migration. > > What is it that we need in a website, exactly, that the wiki at fp.o isn't > giving us? > > It seems like maybe the reason we're not seeing Plone's progress is > because it's not on the front burner, for whatever reason. > > The standard disclaimer: as always, I could be completely wrong. > I think you've pretty much hit the nail on the head. Since the wiki has been doing so well for us, nobody is in a huge hurry to make the Plone site happen. That's not to say that we don't want the Plone site. It will still provide many advantages that we want or need. Progress continues to happen, and the effort certainly hasn't been forgotten. Right now, the first item on the Plone to-do list is an upgrade to our Zope and Plone installations. We want to move to a newer version of Plone that supports more advanced authentication features. We'll most likely be trying to integrate Plone with our upcoming Account System rewrite using those authentication features. This is in the Infrastructure team's ballpark, and we'll be getting help from Jon Steffan, who has helped Fedora Unity put together a similar setup. When we first started on this idea, Jon had packaged the new versions for Unity, but they weren't in Fedora Extras. Thanks to Jon and Aurelian Bompard, the new versions are now in Fedora Extras. The current blockers for that item are as follows: 1. The platform currently installed on fpserv (the Plone site), CentOS, is not running a recent-enough version of Python to handle the new Zope version. The new Plone version requires the new Zope version. We'll either have to upgrade Python or the entire system to something more recent. If we move the system to Fedora Core 5, we'll be able to install the new Zope and Plone versions from Fedora Extras. We're just not sure that Fedora is right for these servers due to its short lifecycle. 2. We'll have to handle some of the planning for the new Account System to make sure that the Plone authentication will be compatible. The Infrastructure team has to decide whether it will be using SQL or LDAP as the storage backend for the new system, and a compatible schema will have to be created for that backend. In theory, we could put something together that works for now and make revisions for compatibility later, but we might save ourselves some hassle by doing a little planning first. We plan to keep the PloneToDo page up-to-date as further developments come along. We haven't set target dates for some of these tasks since they are often dependent upon the work of others. Rest assured that we're staying on top of this. -- Patrick "The N-Man" Barnes nman64@xxxxxxxxx http://www.n-man.com/ LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/nman64 Have I been helpful? Rate my assistance! http://rate.affero.net/nman64/ --
Attachment:
pgpZ6ntVKgZWh.pgp
Description: PGP signature
