cms group requests more detail on wiki; timeframe: cms evaluations to end nov; shortlist end dec

[boud]

hi samizdat-devel,

In principle there could be discussion of samizdat in the indymedia #cms
meeting at 17:00 UTC today (Sun 15.10.06) - i haven't done anything on 
samizdat since last week, i don't know if i'll attend the meeting.

The main points from the brief discussion last weekend (Sun 8.10.06)
(extracts from the log below) are about our report so far on samizdat:
http://techmeet.sarava.org/English/CMSSurveyReportSamizdat

* "it's written too positively"

* "the comments are too short" (e.g. write more detailed explanations,
  not just "yes", maybe a link to a page with more detail for each entry?)


BTW: some people offered to shift the wiki pages to docs.indy - i haven't
checked if that has been done yet. But changing wiki syntax is not 
difficult.

19:56 < txopi> first of all i want to speak about samizdat's survey
19:56 < txopi> i think it is writen too positively
19:56 < txopi> i propose that the author reread it
19:56  * ryan queue
19:57 < txopi> to positive and to short too
19:57 < txopi> remarks like just "yes"
19:57 < txopi> are not enought
19:57 < txopi> END with samizdat
19:57 < txopi> anyone whants to answer this?
19:57 <@Zapata> yeah
19:58 <@Zapata> I have made the same remarks in an earlier meeting
19:58 < txopi> ok. i will continue later iwth the other reviews
19:58 <@Zapata> but since the people writing the reviews aren't here,
      it's a bit hard to discuss it now...
19:58  * boud raises
19:58 <@Zapata> boud, go ahead...
19:58 <@ryan> YO
19:58 <@Zapata> erm
19:58 <@Zapata> sorry
19:58 <@Zapata> ryan first
19:58 <@ryan> its ok
19:59  * boud who first
19:59 <@ryan> i want to discuss multilingual meetings
19:59 < boud> ?
19:59 <@ryan> boud - go
19:59  * kwadronaut queues for next review reporting (spip)
19:59 < boud> just to say that i agree with adding more detail than just
      yes - we'll work on that
20:00 <@Zapata> great
20:00 <@Zapata> end?
20:00 < boud> as for ratings being too positive, we'll have to look a bit
     at ratings for other cms'es to judge how valid they are
20:00  * txopi agrees
20:00 < boud> and specific comments (like zapata made last week) on specific
      parameters would be useful feedback
20:01 < boud> </end>
20:01  * txopi needs to read last meeting's logs ;-)
20:01 <@Zapata> ok... I would propose to ryan to discuss multilingual
      meetings after the survey reports
20:01  * boud btw txopi - thanks for the feedback :)


An earlier part of the conversation gave the time scale for the
evaluation/decision process - i don't know what chance samizdat would have
of being accepted, but of course it would get a hugely increased developer
and user base if it were selected...

The key points are:
* end of nov for finishing evaluations
* end of dec for finishing shortlisting

i think this means we have until end of November to keep adding more info
on which parameters are present, how well they function, etc.

And during December there would be debate about how to select between 
the different cms's to create a "shortlist" according to rough consensus.

My guess is the idea would be to pick 2 or 3 and then many people would
try out those 2 or 3 cms'es.


19:38 < ana> i can see that many people have started their evaluations
19:38 < ana> so ... is end of octuber too early? 
19:39 <@Zapata> YES!
19:39 <@Zapata> ;-)
19:39 < ana> ok then...
19:39 < ana> end of nov for evaluations
19:39 < ana> end of dec for shortlising
19:39 <@ryan> thats ok w/me
19:39 < ana> <end>
19:39 <@Zapata> fine by me as well
19:39  * dannyp twinkles
19:39  * txopi agrees
19:39  * ana looks up twinkle in dictionary
19:39 <@ryan> twinkles :(


cheers
boud