[Gimp-web] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: anyone try the news out?

[Raphaël Quinet]

On Thu, 3 Apr 2003 23:51:17 +0200, "Guillermo S. Romero / Familia Romero" <famrom@infernal-iceberg.com> wrote:
> Simon.Budig@unix-ag.org (2003-04-03 at 1940.11 +0200):
> > Easy solution: Put it in production use. Dont put it behind the "uh,
> > this might become the real thing at some time, this is not intended to
> > be the final thing" protection shield.
> 
> At least, put a link to the new version in the current web page, so
> people can see the transition is taking place...

Yes.  I would prefer this solution for the moment, because there are
still some useful pages in the old site that have not been integrated
into the new one, so these pages would not be accessible anymore if we
would replace the old site by the new one right now.  Linking the new
site from the current one will provide a smoother transition (until
most of the things are ready, at which point we can shut down the old
site and replace it by the new one).

> > If it is online the pressure to fix things is higher and more people
> > would care about this (hopefully).
> 
> ... and can help with typos and errors, among other things.

Yes, I really like this idea.

> Raphael? Could you do that? You could use http://new.gimp.org/ (I hope
> there is no problem with one alias more, asking about it, it does not
> exist yet) or the current name, but I would prefer a positive name
> like "new". TIA.

I agree.  I can insert a link on the home page, and maybe in some
other pages that are frequent "entry points" for our visitors.

How should we proceed?  I suppose that it would be better to make a
copy of mmmaybe.gimp.org on wilber (the same machine as the current
site) so that we can compare the load.  This would also make the
transition easier later.  Then I would have to ask Yosh to define a
DNS alias new.gimp.org and a virtual host that points to it.  Would
that be a good way to start?  The two sites ("new" and "mmmaybe")
could co-exist for a while, with "mmmaybe" getting the more
experimental stuff so that "new" could already be reasonably stable.

Would it be possible to solve the Netscape 4.x compatibility problems
and the SSI issues before announcing the new site publicly?

-Raphaël