head	1.3;
access;
symbols;
locks; strict;
comment	@# @;


1.3
date	2009.09.17.02.28.50;	author LeeBelbin;	state Exp;
branches;
next	1.2;

1.2
date	2009.09.17.01.51.08;	author PiersHiggs;	state Exp;
branches;
next	1.1;

1.1
date	2009.01.20.09.19.19;	author PiersHiggs;	state Exp;
branches;
next	;


desc
@none
@


1.3
log
@none
@
text
@%META:TOPICINFO{author="LeeBelbin" date="1253154530" format="1.1" version="1.3"}%
%META:TOPICPARENT{name="WebHome"}%
---++Historical Plan

   * Spend 2009 limping along with help from the volunteer community on the existing site
   * Continue to document any help and fixes we figure out
   * Scope out the new TDWG site requirements (e.g. can we stick with the same Wiki implementation?)
   * Begin development of the new site (on one of the other boxes TDWG has access to (we think we have 4)
   * Aim to launch the new TDWG site at the end of 2009

I didn't say it was very detailed...

---++New Plan

Three options exist:

   * Business as usual (with all the problems)
   * Get someone to update the existing site with no changes 
   * Redevelop and simplify the site

The third was seen as a good possibility.  In order to do this, we need to consider...

   * How systems at TDWG will be maintained in the future (paid or volunteer - likely the latter)
   * The dependencies in the current systems (Lee to help determine)
   * What options are out there for the redevelopment? 

The outcome was to pay someone to look at the options and to evaluate this. Then a second injection of resources may be required to move to a new regime.

-- Main.PiersHiggs - 20 Jan 2009@


1.2
log
@none
@
text
@d1 1
a1 1
%META:TOPICINFO{author="PiersHiggs" date="1253152268" format="1.1" version="1.2"}%
a2 1

d24 1
d27 1
a27 1
The outcome was to pay someone to look at the options and to evaluate this.
@


1.1
log
@none
@
text
@d1 1
a1 1
%META:TOPICINFO{author="PiersHiggs" date="1232443159" format="1.1" reprev="1.1" version="1.1"}%
d3 3
d14 16
a29 1
-- Main.PiersHiggs - 20 Jan 2009
@