[Zope-PTK] Refactoring warning...

Bill Anderson bill@libc.org
Sat, 29 Jul 2000 14:57:59 -0600

Chris Withers wrote:
> I think we have to be careful in the refactoring process to ensure that
> it's obvious where to get the latest bits from.
> I've experienced this first hand with Squishdot where many people still
> think 0.3.2 is the latest version 'cos that's what it says on Butch's
> Squishdot page on zope.org.
> For example, if I go to Products/PTK, how do I know that the latest
> version of Membership si on BillA's page and that the most recent
> snapshot is on tazz(how many z's?!)'s page?

Well, Kevin is pulling the Membership stuff off his section, so ... ;)

As far as the overall 'current status' of the PTK, wasn't there a PTK Weekly News thingum
like the ZWN? What happened to it? ...Seems it is in the PTKWiki, but couldn't it be
mailed to the list? Would anyone object to that?

AFAIAC, given the current 'alpha' status of the PTK, IMO, you should be on this list if
you are using it. Of course, the PTK pages should reflect the current moving target/alpha
status of PTK right up front.

We do need a summary of the current status, as there are a number of different goings-on.

Of course, I think a problem we have suffered is the blurring/confusing of the difference
between a portal, and a community site The PTK as currently done, is not a portal site,
but rather a community site. Portals are gateways to other places, and communities are
places where you have 'members' that can contribute and participate. Of course, one of the
latest buzzwords is 'vortal', a vertical portal. A vertical portal is like a cross between
a portal for a specific topic (say, Role Playing Games), and the community of people
intereste din that topic. (Yes, you could say I've had too much training in this field ;).

For example, www.yahoo.com is a portal. clubs.yahoo.com is an attempt to get into the
community side of things. technocrat.net is a vortal. It serves as a portal for technology
information, and as a community of persons interested in the field able to discuss related
topics. IME, this confusion has slightly hurt the image of the PTK in at least one
corporate environment (where they have the money to send people like me to training on
things like this).

Perhaps something that needs done is to clarify the intent and purpose of the PTK. A well
laid out purpose statement, backed up with a basic scenario or two should serve the
development of the PTK quite well. Fortunately, we have progressed quite well in it's
absence. However, your concerns echo those of mine, that we are reaching the stage where
we cannot properly continue without these items as part of the foundation of the PTK.

Thoughts, opinions, flames welcome. ;)


Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are easy to annoy,
and have the root password.