Excerpts from Stephen John Smoogen's message of Wed Jul 06 19:34:46 -0400 2011: > On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 15:53, Luke Macken <lmacken@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Excerpts from Stephen John Smoogen's message of Tue Jul 05 17:44:46 -0400 2011: > >> No not http://fedoracommunity.org but > >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/community/ It has been in beta for 2 > >> years now. What do we need to do to finish it (maybe make it > >> start.fedoraproject.org?) or put it aside for other things to do? > > > > This app was never really intended to ever be "finished". It was meant > > to be a platform for building widgets to visualize Fedora data. However, > > I do think it's definitely still 'beta' quality, and the original > > authors (J5, Mo, and I), have not had the cycles to continue to improve > > it. We accomplished our initial goals, and then got pulled into > > different directions (one of which was working on the core of the > > platform, Moksha). > > > > Personally, I still use fedoracommunity on a regular basis, and find it > > to be extremely useful in many ways. Right now we do not have any idea > > as to how many people are using it. I think we should do some log > > Did the following quick statistics using awk: > > Currently we are seeing 380->420 unique ip addresses per month who are > not bots or not referrals from other sites. Most go to /community/ but > ~100 of them made queries beyond standard page data (images, > javascript, and /community/). While it doesn't sound a lot.. for a > site that doesn't have a lot of advertising it is an audience. Wow, yeah, that's more of an audience than I expected. Thanks for figuring that out. > > With regard to the claims that the AGPL makes this app difficult to > > maintain -- I honestly cannot recall a single case where we had to > > hotfix it and jump through the AGPL hoops. If anything, this helped us > > figure out what it takes to develop, deploy, and maintain both > > TurboGears2 and AGPL applications. > > We did it twice right after it was deployed. We went one way in how we > were going to do this and had to undo it the next day when Tom got > clarification that pointing to tickets/patches was not acceptable. If > we could move to Apache or just GPL I would be quite happy. My memory > of it was that there was a bunch of stuff having to be done right > then, but it is a memory and probably not a good one. Are you sure we got clarification that pointing to tickets was *not* acceptable? Because we currently have a "Fedora Infrastructure Hotfixes" link that points to: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/query?status=new&status=assigned&status=reopened&group=milestone&keywords=%7Ehotfix&order=priority Either way, I do vaguely remember those hotfixes now that you mention it. I still think that keeping our fedoracommunity frontend AGPL is a good thing. We did, however, recently change the core platform (Moksha), from AGPL to Apache. luke -- websites mailing list websites@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/websites
