After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 662446 - foundation.gnome.org/devel webspace
foundation.gnome.org/devel webspace
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: sysadmin
Classification: Infrastructure
Component: Other
unspecified
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: GNOME Sysadmins
GNOME Sysadmins
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2011-10-22 09:37 UTC by Andrea Veri
Modified: 2011-11-09 12:01 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Andrea Veri 2011-10-22 09:37:32 UTC
Hi,

we currently started planning an huge update for the foundation.g.o area. We would love receiving a webspace (foundation.gnome.org/devel) and a DB linked to it. (we will probably stick with how gnome.org is designed, thus WordPress needs a DB to store its data in)

Also, we'll have to scp the data over, would it be possible to make that dir owned by gnomeweb perhaps? (so I can easily manage ACLs directly from Mango)

Thanks in advance,

Andrea
Comment 1 Olav Vitters 2011-10-30 17:00:53 UTC
Regarding using Wordpress: no problem.

Regarding managing your own wordpress instance: That is a no.

It should be managed by the sysadmin team. I'm not going to leave upgrade of wordpress to other team. If wordpress has a new versions, the same person should upgrade all of the wordpress instances.

I don't know anything about Wordpress myself, so cannot assist myself.
Comment 2 Andrea Veri 2011-10-30 17:10:43 UTC
This looks sane enough to me. You guys can maintain the WP istance itself, we just need the relevant accesses to deploy and develop the renewed foundation.g.o website.

Andreas, any thoughts about this?
Comment 3 Andreas Nilsson 2011-11-07 19:55:44 UTC
Adding Vinicius to cc to get his thoughts on this.

I think you just need a separate DB, the rest it can share with the Wordpress install we use for gnome.org

Another alternative would be to just have it as a subpage under gnome.org and linking the foundation.gnome.org to that.

How do you feel about this approach?
http://wptest.gnome.org/foundation/
Comment 4 Brian Cameron 2011-11-07 20:02:59 UTC
From the board, I can confirm that fits in line with our overall plans to enhance the foundation website.  Please take care of foundation website enhancements as quickly as possible.  Thanks!
Comment 5 Andrea Veri 2011-11-08 17:12:55 UTC
Andreas, the provided WP istance [1] looks OK to me, so we'll just need another DB when we will move everything to production. (foundation.gnome.org)

Can you please provide me a login so I can start migrating stuff over?

[1] http://wptest.gnome.org/foundation/
Comment 6 Vinicius Depizzol 2011-11-08 17:27:52 UTC
Weren't the idea just to have a Foundation full-featured page inside gnome.org instead of a whole new Foundation website? This was the plan that Andreas and I came with together with yuliansu[1], who worked on this during her outreach program. 

I don't think having another instance of WordPress is worth in this situation. As Olav pointed in some previous discussion[2] on gnome-web-list, this is starting to get unmaintainable.

Andrea, what is the plan you're working on? Can you adapt your idea to fit it inside www.gnome.org?

Thank you.

[1] http://yuliansu.wordpress.com/2011/08/10/gnome-foundation-webpage-design/
[2] https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-web-list/2011-November/msg00003.html
Comment 7 Andrea Veri 2011-11-08 18:17:38 UTC
I wonder why no one ever pinged me nor the Membership Committee (who is responsible for the Foundation website) about the above plan.

Anyway I agree that we can easily integrate the foundation area into the existing gnome.org domain (to something like gnome.org/foundation and other sub-areas like gnome.org/foundation/membership etc.), our plan was mainly focused on moving foundation.g.o to look like gnome.org. (i.e same design, same structure etc.)

Vinicius, if you have any suggestion, feel free to let me know either here or via IRC, so we can finally start working things out.

cheers.
Comment 8 Andreas Nilsson 2011-11-08 22:09:22 UTC
(In reply to comment #7)
> I wonder why no one ever pinged me nor the Membership Committee (who is
> responsible for the Foundation website) about the above plan.

I didn't actually know that it was the membership committee that was responsible for that, but was under the impression it was the board. Sorry that I missed to note you guys.
I recall sending an e-mail about it to both marketing-list and web-list, but it was some time ago.
Comment 9 Andreas Nilsson 2011-11-08 22:17:09 UTC
(In reply to comment #6)
> Weren't the idea just to have a Foundation full-featured page inside gnome.org
> instead of a whole new Foundation website? This was the plan that Andreas and I
> came with together with yuliansu[1], who worked on this during her outreach
> program. 

It was a more stripped down version with more focused content, but having this sub navigation similar to what we have now will probably work fine too.
Comment 10 Andreas Nilsson 2011-11-09 11:13:27 UTC
Andrea Veri now have access to admin of www.gnome.org and wptest.gnome.org where the implementation will happen.
Is this bug still valid?
Comment 11 Andrea Veri 2011-11-09 12:01:51 UTC
We can close it down now. As explained to Andreas yesterday I'll keep him and the Board informed and updated as soon as my work will get forward time by time.

Thanks.