wiki-archive/twiki/data/TDWG_Systems/TDWGSystemPlan.txt,v

95 lines
2.0 KiB
Plaintext

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
@