Con: No search integration with http://www.silverstripe.org/search (needs opensearch)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SilverStripe Core Development" group.
To post to this group, send email to silverst...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to silverstripe-d...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/silverstripe-dev?hl=en.
Here are some other related discussion threads on the small business
group, for those who may not be aware:
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/silverstripe-small-business/-gHJbGnxtOo/discussion
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/silverstripe-small-business/8-7BL2SvPJc/discussion
On Sun Apr 15 21:51:58 2012, Will Rossiter wrote:
>> Con: No search integration with http://www.silverstripe.org/search
>> (needs opensearch)
>
> If the source for the modules site is public I'd be happy to
> contribute to getting open search support working between
> SilverStripe.org <http://SilverStripe.org>. For those not aware, me
> and Ingo started on http://www.silverstripe.org/search as a base for
> global searching so we have a precedent on that aspect.
>
> I think the design for silverstripe.org <http://silverstripe.org>
> modules section needs a significant overhaul anyway so could be good
> to give the site a fresh start. We can use the global nav from pages
> like http://doc.silverstripe.org on the new
> extensions.silverstripe.org <http://extensions.silverstripe.org> (or
> whatever we call it) to make it easy to switch between the sites and
> provide global search.
>
>
> On 15/04/2012, at 9:39 PM, Ingo Schommer wrote:
>
>> Hello everybody,
>>
>> We have two really awesome GSOC ideas which have a large impact on
>> the community as a whole:
>> - New module architecture around Composer
>> - Improve ss.org/modules <http://ss.org/modules> (and integrate it
>> with Composer)
>>
>> We're considering using the second project to migrate the current
>> module/theme/widget logic on ss.org <http://ss.org/> to a new website,
>> for architectural and organisational reasons.
>> The decision is going to influence the GSOC project quite heavily,
>> so we need to make it fast - here's some pros/cons:
>>
>> Separate website (modules.silverstripe.org
>> <http://modules.silverstripe.org/>):
>> - Pro: Sandboxed, easier for community to contribute and maintain
>> - Con: More integration work required (single sign on, exposing
>> module ownership on profiles)
>> - Con: Needs more design/branding oversight
>> - Con: No search integration with http://www.silverstripe.org/search
>> (needs opensearch)
>>
>> Integrate with silverstripe.org <http://silverstripe.org/>:
>> - Pro: Single sign on (reused existing logins)
>> - Pro: Design mostly exists already
>> - Pro: Integrated with existing community profiles
>>
>> Despite the many cons, I think the first point (easier community
>> contributions)
>> makes up for all of those - and we're tending towards making it a
>> separate website.
>> Its mainly a decision for GSOC and the team maintaining ss.org
>> <http://ss.org/>,
>> but we also want to ensure that the solution still works for its
>> users: you! :)
>> Apart from potential new features, do you think a separate website
>> will still
>> allow you to discover and review modules efficiently?
>>
>> There's some background discussion about potential new features and
>> project direction here:
>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/silverstripe-dev/iYmT1tJlb-E/discussion
>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/silverstripe-dev/IbNAQyeg5gc/discussion
>>
>> Thanks
>> Ingo
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups "SilverStripe Core Development" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to
>> silverst...@googlegroups.com
>> <mailto:silverst...@googlegroups.com>.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> silverstripe-d...@googlegroups.com
>> <mailto:silverstripe-d...@googlegroups.com>.
We're considering using the second project to migrate the currentmodule/theme/widget logic on ss.org to a new website,
for architectural and organisational reasons.The decision is going to influence the GSOC project quite heavily,so we need to make it fast - here's some pros/cons:
Having a structure in place for SSO would make it easier to bring other systems under a single umbrella. For example, we currently make heavy use of GitHub and Trac. On a less critical, more fun note, it would be cool to have member profiles running on a site such as SilverStripe.me, with profiles linking to the forum, addons site, GitHub, Trac, and anywhere else.
We're not that keen on open sourcing the *entire* codebass of SS.org, because it would make creating a site that looks identical the path of least resistance, which would create a confusing situation for users. We could build the adding section as a module that we load into SS.org, but there's still refactoring effort there, and it makes it unclear exactly how the module ties into the rest of the site. Having a separate site for modules with an OSS codebass would make collaboration easier.