...is up: http://www.jenzed.com/pgcawiki/pmwiki.php The most useful part for now, I think, is the Roadmap: http://www.jenzed.com/pgcawiki/pmwiki.php?n=Main.Roadmap. I've tried to break down what we need to do into manageable benchmarks. Much of the content was drawn from the mailing lists; as you'll see, a lot of it is in "dump" form, where relevant snippets from discussions were dropped onto the wiki page for later clean-up and up-shotting. (All full names have been converted to initials.) Please be kind: I'm new to wiki-building (and, of course, to PG Canada). I am worried that, since nobody knows me and I have no credibility with this group, I will annoy people by creating the wiki and laying out what I think we need to do next. I hope you will give me the benefit of the doubt, and excuse my forwardness. I've done a lot of software project management - planning is an almost reflexive reaction with me by now. jen.
On Sun, 6 Mar 2005, Jennifer Zickerman wrote:
...is up:
Hi Jen. Nice work there. Yes, it's all material I've read before, but the organizing of it does help give a clearer picture. Andrew
/me . o O ( Did Jennifer just volunteer to be our web-maven? ) -- James Jennifer Zickerman wrote:
....is up:
http://www.jenzed.com/pgcawiki/pmwiki.php
The most useful part for now, I think, is the Roadmap: http://www.jenzed.com/pgcawiki/pmwiki.php?n=Main.Roadmap. I've tried to break down what we need to do into manageable benchmarks.
Much of the content was drawn from the mailing lists; as you'll see, a lot of it is in "dump" form, where relevant snippets from discussions were dropped onto the wiki page for later clean-up and up-shotting. (All full names have been converted to initials.)
Please be kind: I'm new to wiki-building (and, of course, to PG Canada). I am worried that, since nobody knows me and I have no credibility with this group, I will annoy people by creating the wiki and laying out what I think we need to do next. I hope you will give me the benefit of the doubt, and excuse my forwardness. I've done a lot of software project management - planning is an almost reflexive reaction with me by now.
jen. _______________________________________________ Project Gutenberg of Canada Website: http://www.projectgutenberg.ca/ List: pgcanada@lists.pglaf.org Archives: http://lists.pglaf.org/private.cgi/pgcanada/
Sure, I'm down with Web Wrangling. :) What's the status on our hosting space? In January, Russell said he was putting some space together for us, but also mentioned that he had other time commitments, so maybe this didn't work out. In the short term, I have 2 gb on a hosted site that I'm not using - it would probably be okay to get us started. Linux, MySQL, PHP/Perl/Java. James, would this be sufficient to host your UniBook? I'm *dying* to take a look at your app - it sounds super cool. jen. James Linden wrote:
/me . o O ( Did Jennifer just volunteer to be our web-maven? )
-- James
Jennifer Zickerman wrote:
....is up:
Well Jennifer, I fear that I'm making a mess of the wiki... :-( Could you look at it and maybe help me figure out how to do things a bit cleaner? <wiki_hater>James</wiki_hater>
This is a great doc, James - I've got a much clearer view of the whole process. Before I start work on wikifiying it, I'd like your thoughts (i.e., approval) regarding chunking it up into separate pages. For example, I thought that the "Scanning", "Scan Verification" and "Scan Processing" topics could replace the existing "Scanning" page on the wiki. I'd leave the existing text, which is just snippets from relevant conversations on the mailing list, at the bottom of the page; over time, I (or another wiki worker) can go through these snippets to see if there's anything to add to your content. The reason I think the topics would work best as separate pages is because, first, I expect there will be lots of ongoing expansion and refinement, which I think is easier to manage if we're working with smaller documents. Second, I think that a person *doing* a particular task (such as scanning) would find it easier to work with a smaller, targeted document. If you agree, I'll go ahead and expand the wiki topic list and integrate your doc. jen. James Linden wrote:
Well Jennifer, I fear that I'm making a mess of the wiki... :-( Could you look at it and maybe help me figure out how to do things a bit cleaner?
Jennifer Zickerman wrote:
This is a great doc, James - I've got a much clearer view of the whole process. Before I start work on wikifiying it, I'd like your thoughts (i.e., approval) regarding chunking it up into separate pages.
If you think that will work better, then by all means, do go ahead. I just ask that a copy of the entire document is available in one piece as well, if possible? This is mostly so I can easily compare to my local version for changes, etc. I just want to reaffirm that my document is by no means the authoritative manual for PG Canada. It is solely my version of how I think things should be implemented. I posted it to the wiki so that everyone can read and edit, so we can refine and/or redefine it together. And, like I said previously, I need to flesh out more detail for many sections. I'm looking forward to seeing what everyone says... even if the end result is that everyone says it's a pile of s***. :-) -- James
James Linden wrote:
If you think that will work better, then by all means, do go ahead. I just ask that a copy of the entire document is available in one piece as well, if possible? This is mostly so I can easily compare to my local version for changes, etc.
That makes sense. However, I think we must avoid multiple copies of the same document on the wiki. Therefore, I'll re-organize the navigation structure to point to sub-sections in your doc, and we'll leave it in one piece. jen.
Regarding James' Mega-Master Process Doc; Jennifer Zickerman wrote:
James Linden wrote:
I just ask that a copy of the entire document is available in one piece as well, if possible? This is mostly so I can easily compare to my local version for changes, etc.
That makes sense. However, I think we must avoid multiple copies of the same document on the wiki. Therefore, I'll re-organize the navigation structure to point to sub-sections in your doc, and we'll leave it in one piece.
I think I came up with a "best of both worlds" solution. I've chunked the content into individual pages (all listed under the "Process" heading in the sidebar), but created an additional page ("Process A-Z") that collates the content into a single document via programmatic "include" statements. jen.
participants (3)
-
Andrew Sly -
James Linden -
Jennifer Zickerman