[wplug-internet] Internet Committee

[Duncan Hutty]

Michael Semcheski wrote:
> Hello Everyone,
>
> Ted and Bill -- you seemed interested in the discussion we had
> regarding the server setup at the board meeting on Monday.  I'm cc'ing
> you to see if you'd be interested in joining the internet committee.
>
> Internet Committee members:
>
> I'm working on getting the virtual server setup.  We have some choices
> to make about how we want WPLUG's internet services setup.
>
> Do we want to keep using MediaWiki?  (e.g., TWiki was brought up as a
> possibility.)
>   
One of the major advantages of twiki is how it copes with multiple 
"separate" wikis within the same installation. I don't think this is 
likely to important for us.
Against that are the reports that I have received that it is 
awkward/unintuitive to use for the occasional user, even if technically 
inclined. I suspect that with a few (prominent) exceptions, most usage 
of our wiki is a) read only and b) occasional so that's probably important.
Conversely mediawiki has a much higher familiarity score since everyone 
of our likely user base uses wikipedia. In addition, I think that from a 
support perspective, mediawiki wins on the familiarity front. We have 
seen the downside of using lesser known software with OpenACS: it 
massively reduces the pool of potential admins.
I couldn't recommend switching unless we have a strong reason to do so.
> Who gets shell accounts?  (ie, There are pros and cons to each.)
>   
sysadmins: people who are going to support the system & its software. If 
we are to start offering shell accounts for ordinary users, this should 
be a directive from the Board. It opens up all kinds of issues. If the 
Board thinks that this is within the Mission of wplug (and there are 
good arguments for it as well as against), then we have to think 
carefully about how to protect ourselves both technically and socially 
from error or malice.
> Where should the board and committees keep their documents?  (e.g., on
> the server, in google documents, webdav, etc.)
> How can we maximize the resources we have on the server?
>   
Is there any reason why these "documents" should treated differently 
from any other content to go onto the webserver?
There should be a content management system, which could be as simple as 
having a commit hook script in subversion (or cron job or ... or ...) 
that puts the latest version of the content into the webserver document 
root or as complex as we deem necessary to satisfy wplug's collective 
proclivity for tech.

The most important point is to have easily available documentation that 
says "here are the decisions we made, here's how to get started, here 
are instructions for common tasks (user administration, content 
add/remove/rollback, list management, etc.)"
--
Duncan Hutty