Re: Comments for announcement

["Aaron D. Turner" <aturner@best.com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----


On Mon, 26 Oct 1998, Micah Yoder wrote:

> Yeah...announcing it to all those would probably be overkill at this
> point.  Why not just send a low-profile looking note to lwn and they'll
> run it near the back page.  That should be enough to get a few people
> interested, but not a flood.  I don't think I want the masses to know
> until we have most of the infrastructure in place.

Agreed.  I'll send a small blurb out tonight or tomorrow, to a few site
maintainers asking for their help in finding our core group.
 
> > During #1, I think 4-6 people total can do it in a reasonable amount of
> > time.  More people and it becomes hard to control the process and you
> 
> Right.  Maybe another one or two just for the graphics.  That can be a
> separate person, preferrably someone familiar with the GIMP.  I have a
> friend that might be interested, but I think he's kind of busy.

Well feel out your friend.  I've got a couple of friends who do graphic
design and are very good (who are also pretty busy) but wouldn't use GIMP
(but I don't care about what tools they use- I just want something that
looks nice).
 
> > start having fights.  Less, and it's going to take more than 2 months to
> > get where we want.  (I'd love to go live Jan 1st.)
> 
> Hmm.  Let's not set any dates here.  :-)  *All* successful OSS projects,
> probably without exception, don't do that kind of thing!

It's more of a goal than anything set in stone.  I just don't want to have
this go live June 30th, 2001 if you know what I mean!

> > During #2, the scene changes a lot.  As the site becomes more popular,
> > and start recieving more entries, we need more proof-readers, and people
> > to just write entries.  Because of the diversity of topics, I'd like to
> > see about 20 people after 6 months.
> 
> At least.  Hopefully more like 50-100, given the broad number of topics
> we want covered.  I think at least 2 or 3 people should proofread
> articles BEFORE they go online.  Quality of information should be our
> top priority.  That is one area where some other publishers really
> lack.  (Read the "Letters" section of Linux Journal sometime....)

Yeah, quality.  It will be hard to manage that many people in such a short
period of time, but let's hope we have that problem!

> > Right now I see myself as systems management & site management.  Working
> > out the deals to get things done, and deciding where the site should
> > go/do.  Below that:
> > 
> > Someone will need to maintain/lead the databases (ht://dig and SQL??).
> > Someone to lead forms/CGI's.
> > Someone to lead the indexes and content.
> 
> Yes, I think this is a very good plan!
> 
> > What do people think?  Am I way off base?  Micah, you've show a lot of
> > interest in the DB's- is that something you'd be interested in leading?
> 
> Yeah, I think I'll take the SQL side of things.  How about finding
> someone else for the ht://dig - I have no experience with Web search
> engines (not that I couldn't learn if necessary...)

Ok.  I can handle the ht://dig side of things at least temporarily- I've
set it up before.  One thing I'd like from you in the next week is a clear
statement or two regarding the use of SQL on the site.  I understand that
you see it helping with indexing/searching, but how it will interface with
the site is confusing me.  Also what value to the site will such a
database(s) bring to the end user and maintainers?

Also, you'll need to do some research as to what SQL engine we should use.
PosgresSQL may have more features, but MySQL is faster.  If we're talking
about needing 50-100 moderators, speed will be *critical* for searches.
Hence, if we don't need the extra features in PosgresSQL, we shouldn't use
it.  It's you're call- whatever you say we need is good enough for me.

Later...


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBNjVn+DM3jpXy1kJtAQFOuAP+KlawX4b/aCYSAgdWA62xZp2hNBbRt33E
lHsgdEtFEF4Jm7uUZI8fKFchWZuflo5ofs8K0NypNk5fEtW4WlLxI6GxZasdhCga
j5wVdSiFWeXyUtQmIbBDkptgTL1Imx0IBGtOvPKgt7V8dAOq2YNTmJ/6AK3qnk9i
geTzzcIAJmU=
=qchk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----