Progress of migration to plone? IRC meeting suggestion

[Dimitris Glezos]

Hi websites team,

I tried searching for what's active team (current/planned actions, todo)
so that I can identify areas I could contribute... I wouldn't say my
search was particularly successful. :)

I did find the following useful pages though:

: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Websites/PloneToDo
    Plone TODOs (no dates).

: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject/PloneIssues
     A few DocsProject ideas/requirements for the new Plone site.

:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-websites-list/2006-June/msg00040.html
     Some thoughts on IRC about Plone.


So, I'm throwing the idea of an IRC meeting, so that everyone will get
an update of what's going on, who is interested in helping out and
where, what's needed to be done, etc.

I'll go one step further and throw a date too: Thursday 27/7 14:00 UTC [1].

-dim


[1]:
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?year=2006&month=...


-- 
Dimitris Glezos
Jabber ID: glezos(a)jabber.org, GPG: 0xA5A04C3B
http://dimitris.glezos.com/


"He who gives up functionality for ease of use
loses both and deserves neither." (Anonymous)
--

[Greg DeKoenigsberg]

/me is still a bit uncertain about the goals of the plone migration.

What is it that we need in a website, exactly, that the wiki at fp.o isn't 
giving us?

It seems like maybe the reason we're not seeing Plone's progress is 
because it's not on the front burner, for whatever reason.

The standard disclaimer: as always, I could be completely wrong.

--g

-------------------------------------------------------------
Greg DeKoenigsberg || Fedora Project || fedoraproject.org
Be an Ambassador || http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors
-------------------------------------------------------------

On Mon, 24 Jul 2006, Dimitris Glezos wrote:

>  
>  Hi websites team,
>  
>  I tried searching for what's active team (current/planned actions, todo)
>  so that I can identify areas I could contribute... I wouldn't say my
>  search was particularly successful. :)
>  
>  I did find the following useful pages though:
>  
>  : http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Websites/PloneToDo
>      Plone TODOs (no dates).
>  
>  : http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject/PloneIssues
>       A few DocsProject ideas/requirements for the new Plone site.
>  
>  :
>  https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-websites-list/2006-June/msg00040.html
>       Some thoughts on IRC about Plone.
>  
>  
>  So, I'm throwing the idea of an IRC meeting, so that everyone will get
>  an update of what's going on, who is interested in helping out and
>  where, what's needed to be done, etc.
>  
>  I'll go one step further and throw a date too: Thursday 27/7 14:00 UTC [1].
>  
>  -dim
>  
>  
>  [1]:
>
> http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?year=2006&month=...
>  
>  
>  -- 
>  Dimitris Glezos
>  Jabber ID: glezos(a)jabber.org, GPG: 0xA5A04C3B
>  http://dimitris.glezos.com/
>  
>  
>  "He who gives up functionality for ease of use
>  loses both and deserves neither." (Anonymous)
>  --
>  
>  -- 
>  Fedora-websites-list mailing list
>  Fedora-websites-list(a)redhat.com
>  https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-websites-list
>

[Patrick W. Barnes]

On Monday 24 July 2006 11:07, Greg DeKoenigsberg <gdk(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  /me is still a bit uncertain about the goals of the plone migration.
>
>  What is it that we need in a website, exactly, that the wiki at fp.o isn't
>  giving us?
>
>  It seems like maybe the reason we're not seeing Plone's progress is
>  because it's not on the front burner, for whatever reason.
>
>  The standard disclaimer: as always, I could be completely wrong.
>  
I think you've pretty much hit the nail on the head.  Since the wiki has been 
doing so well for us, nobody is in a huge hurry to make the Plone site 
happen.  That's not to say that we don't want the Plone site.  It will still 
provide many advantages that we want or need.  Progress continues to happen, 
and the effort certainly hasn't been forgotten.

Right now, the first item on the Plone to-do list is an upgrade to our Zope 
and Plone installations.  We want to move to a newer version of Plone that 
supports more advanced authentication features.  We'll most likely be trying 
to integrate Plone with our upcoming Account System rewrite using those 
authentication features.  This is in the Infrastructure team's ballpark, and 
we'll be getting help from Jon Steffan, who has helped Fedora Unity put 
together a similar setup.  When we first started on this idea, Jon had 
packaged the new versions for Unity, but they weren't in Fedora Extras.  
Thanks to Jon and Aurelian Bompard, the new versions are now in Fedora 
Extras.

The current blockers for that item are as follows:

1.  The platform currently installed on fpserv (the Plone site), CentOS, is 
not running a recent-enough version of Python to handle the new Zope version.  
The new Plone version requires the new Zope version.  We'll either have to 
upgrade Python or the entire system to something more recent.  If we move the 
system to Fedora Core 5, we'll be able to install the new Zope and Plone 
versions from Fedora Extras.  We're just not sure that Fedora is right for 
these servers due to its short lifecycle.

2.  We'll have to handle some of the planning for the new Account System to 
make sure that the Plone authentication will be compatible.  The 
Infrastructure team has to decide whether it will be using SQL or LDAP as the 
storage backend for the new system, and a compatible schema will have to be 
created for that backend.  In theory, we could put something together that 
works for now and make revisions for compatibility later, but we might save 
ourselves some hassle by doing a little planning first.

We plan to keep the PloneToDo page up-to-date as further developments come 
along.  We haven't set target dates for some of these tasks since they are 
often dependent upon the work of others.  Rest assured that we're staying on 
top of this.

-- 
Patrick "The N-Man" Barnes
nman64(a)n-man.com

http://www.n-man.com/

LinkedIn:
http://www.linkedin.com/in/nman64

Have I been helpful?  Rate my assistance!
http://rate.affero.net/nman64/
--

[Greg DeKoenigsberg]

Great update, Patrick.  Thanks.

--g

-------------------------------------------------------------
Greg DeKoenigsberg || Fedora Project || fedoraproject.org
Be an Ambassador || http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors
-------------------------------------------------------------

On Tue, 25 Jul 2006, Patrick W. Barnes wrote:

>  On Monday 24 July 2006 11:07, Greg DeKoenigsberg
> <gdk(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  > /me is still a bit uncertain about the goals of the plone migration.
>  >
>  > What is it that we need in a website, exactly, that the wiki at fp.o isn't
>  > giving us?
>  >
>  > It seems like maybe the reason we're not seeing Plone's progress is
>  > because it's not on the front burner, for whatever reason.
>  >
>  > The standard disclaimer: as always, I could be completely wrong.
>  >
>  
>  I think you've pretty much hit the nail on the head.  Since the wiki has been 
>  doing so well for us, nobody is in a huge hurry to make the Plone site 
>  happen.  That's not to say that we don't want the Plone site.  It will still 
>  provide many advantages that we want or need.  Progress continues to happen, 
>  and the effort certainly hasn't been forgotten.
>  
>  Right now, the first item on the Plone to-do list is an upgrade to our Zope 
>  and Plone installations.  We want to move to a newer version of Plone that 
>  supports more advanced authentication features.  We'll most likely be trying 
>  to integrate Plone with our upcoming Account System rewrite using those 
>  authentication features.  This is in the Infrastructure team's ballpark, and 
>  we'll be getting help from Jon Steffan, who has helped Fedora Unity put 
>  together a similar setup.  When we first started on this idea, Jon had 
>  packaged the new versions for Unity, but they weren't in Fedora Extras.  
>  Thanks to Jon and Aurelian Bompard, the new versions are now in Fedora 
>  Extras.
>  
>  The current blockers for that item are as follows:
>  
>  1.  The platform currently installed on fpserv (the Plone site), CentOS, is 
>  not running a recent-enough version of Python to handle the new Zope version.  
>  The new Plone version requires the new Zope version.  We'll either have to 
>  upgrade Python or the entire system to something more recent.  If we move the 
>  system to Fedora Core 5, we'll be able to install the new Zope and Plone 
>  versions from Fedora Extras.  We're just not sure that Fedora is right for 
>  these servers due to its short lifecycle.
>  
>  2.  We'll have to handle some of the planning for the new Account System to 
>  make sure that the Plone authentication will be compatible.  The 
>  Infrastructure team has to decide whether it will be using SQL or LDAP as the 
>  storage backend for the new system, and a compatible schema will have to be 
>  created for that backend.  In theory, we could put something together that 
>  works for now and make revisions for compatibility later, but we might save 
>  ourselves some hassle by doing a little planning first.
>  
>  We plan to keep the PloneToDo page up-to-date as further developments come 
>  along.  We haven't set target dates for some of these tasks since they are 
>  often dependent upon the work of others.  Rest assured that we're staying on 
>  top of this.
>  
>  -- 
>  Patrick "The N-Man" Barnes
>  nman64(a)n-man.com
>  
>  http://www.n-man.com/
>  
>  LinkedIn:
>  http://www.linkedin.com/in/nman64
>  
>  Have I been helpful?  Rate my assistance!
>  http://rate.affero.net/nman64/
>  -- 
>  
>

[Aurelien Bompard]

Le mardi 25 juillet 2006 08:34, Patrick W. Barnes a écrit :
>  When we first started on this idea, Jon had packaged the new versions
> for
>  Unity, but they weren't in Fedora Extras. Thanks to Jon and Aurelian
>  Bompard, the new versions are now in Fedora Extras. 
>  1.  The platform currently installed on fpserv (the Plone site),
> CentOS,
>  is not running a recent-enough version of Python to handle the new Zope
>  version. The new Plone version requires the new Zope version.  We'll
>  either have to upgrade Python or the entire system to something more
>  recent.  If we move the system to Fedora Core 5, we'll be able to install
>  the new Zope and Plone versions from Fedora Extras.  We're just not sure
>  that Fedora is right for these servers due to its short lifecycle. 
I'm maintaining Zope & Plone in Extras, with the help of some contributors. 
Those pieces of software have very strong requirements on the versions 
(Zope requires a particular version of python, and Plone requires a 
particular version of Zope). And usually, those versions are not the latest 
ones.

If you want to use a long lifcycle distribution like CentOS or RHEL, you 
will pretty much end up having to use custom packages of Zope/Plone if you 
need recent versions of the stack. That said, it is not very hard to do, 
and it could be a very viable solution.

>  2.  We'll have to handle some of the planning for the new Account
> System
>  to make sure that the Plone authentication will be compatible.  The
>  Infrastructure team has to decide whether it will be using SQL or LDAP as
>  the storage backend for the new system, and a compatible schema will have
>  to be created for that backend.  In theory, we could put something
>  together that works for now and make revisions for compatibility later,
>  but we might save ourselves some hassle by doing a little planning first. 
I am working in the Infrastructure team on the Account System rewrite. The 
decision for the back-end is not certain yet, but LDAP will very probably 
be available. At the worst it will not be the primary source of information 
(it would be kept in sync), but that should not change anything for Plone.

Anyway, we're still working on it, but rest assured that we'll keep you 
informed when the new Account System takes shape.

Aurélien
-- 
http://aurelien.bompard.org  ~~~~  Jabber : abompard(a)jabber.fr
"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build
bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce
bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning." -- Rich Cook