Re: Requiring DOAP instead of MAINTAINERS file

[Étienne Bersac <bersace03 laposte net>]

Hi,

> Perhaps it is just because 'infrastructure' means something different
> to everyone. To me it is clearly the usage of SVN, Mango, CMS, etc
> (not the gtk+, lib*).

There is no confusion between plateform (gtk+, lib*) and infrastructure
(hosting, etc.)

> On the other hand, having d-d-l is so much nicer than having to
> subscribe to 100+ devel mailing lists. Or manually asking each
> maintainer to please allow a specific SVN account to be able to commit
> in their module.

Having a generic homepage does not mean having per project mailing list.
DOAP should point to the mailing list (default to d-d-l).

One key point behind the Gnome infrastructure, is consistency. I really
to like http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/ , http://live.gnome.org,
http://library.gnome.org/, http://svn.gnome.org/viewvc/, etc.
consistency. Wouldn't it be nice to have something similar for e.g.
projects.gnome.org ?

As usual, Gnome should make developer life easy. No need to be a guru of
xhtml+css to mimic current gnome.org theme. A gnome dev is not supposed
to be a web guru. Everything should be automatic and "factorized" in the
gnome.org domain. Docs in library.gnome.org, wiki in live.gnome.org,
download in ftp.gnome.org, sources in svn.gnome.org, etc. We need a head
site over all that infrastructure pieces. kind of projects.gnome.org or
even <module-name>.gnome.org.

If DOAP is the way to it, then go for DOAP. Having the SVN repos as the
sources of all that website is just a must have. Associated with the
install-module script, this should be enough to have minimal website set
up and up to date. Mango may allow to "request website" just like
"request SVN repos".

And aside voting for DOAP, i vote for www.gnome.org/projects genocide.

My 2¢

Regards,
Étienne.
-- 
E Ultreïa !