On Fri, 14 Aug 2009, Ricky Zhou wrote:
On 2009-08-14 10:31:20 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
> If it's marketing related or an official support system we should probably
> move it to the normal app servers. Though I don't really know what
> marketing had in mind for it.
Maybe we need to have a rule for what should be considered value added
(like blogs.fp.o) vs. "official" (like fcomm). For what it's worth, the
test I much used was:
17:58 < ricky> If this is going to be considered a value-added service, it'll
likely be on a server that's not covered by the freeze
17:59 < ianweller> ricky: define 'value-added' :)
17:59 < mchua> ricky: (3) websites + marketing - being taken care of, mostly a
content question in my mind; we've got it down, so this is not a worry.
17:59 < ricky> It mean not in our critical path - stuff that needs to happen to
make Fedora
17:59 < ricky> .tiny
http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/fedora-infrastructure.git?p=fedora-infras...
17:59 < zodbot> ricky:
http://tinyurl.com/ox5a33
17:59 < mchua> ricky: yeah, this is very much a value-added.
I definitely slanted things by saying "not critical path" there, but
that was what I thought the rule was, so please correct me if I'm
mistaken :-)
I guess we'll have to talk about what "they" want to do with it. If the
docs team is going to use it, I'd say that's critical path. It'd be on
the same line as
http://fedoraproject.org/ in that case. And if marketing
is going to do press releases or anything that might get linked to from
the release announcement, I'd put that in critical path too.
Are we going to have multiple zikula installs going at once here or share
one? Sorry that I'm not totally up to date on this. I'm aware of the
docs zikula usage but I'm not sure what the plan is for marketing at the
moment.
-Mike