On Fri, 21 Feb 2014 15:08:23 -0600
"David C. Rankin" <drankinatty@...> wrote:

> On 02/21/2014 05:38 AM, E. Liddell wrote:
> > All of the site navigation is in the sidebar on the left below 
> > the Trinity logo, in ordinary links.  And the code mostly maxes out at 5 nested
> > divs. ;)
> > 
> > I have no idea when the actual deployment will take place.  I still have to
> > produce matching skins for Bugzilla and the wiki (I may need to get in touch 
> > with you off-list about the new wiki at some point).  Darrell is the one doing
> > most of the content retouch, and he's a very busy guy right now.
> 
> Sure feel free. If the site is all inclusive, then we may not need a separate
> wiki (although I usually see that major packages/distros normally have a main
> site, then the nitty gritty details in a wiki). If you can identify what if any
> of the current site you see going into the wiki, I can go ahead and do the
> transition on my mediawiki install and then just move the content to wherever
> the final location will be. What I don't know is what content is 'site' and what
> content would go to 'wiki'. If we can get an idea of the split, then I'm happy
> to start work on the wiki.

For the moment, the division between the site proper and the wiki is
still the same as on the old site. Keeping stuff that's going to change at
more than a snail's pace in the wiki still makes sense.  Darrell may have 
some plans to shift stuff around that he hasn't discussed with me, though. 

In addition to the current site content, we're adding the contents of
the FAQ found in the Help Center to the site.  The plan (if Tim agrees) 
is to eventually have all of the Handbooks (at least the English versions) 
available there too, but at the moment, the content is in too rough/unupdated 
a shape to reflect well on us, so that's on hold until after V.14.0

> And even though I did a test install on mediawiki, if you guys are in love with
> Fos, I can work with that as well, I just find it so limited and inflexible
> compared to mediawiki that it usually takes 5 times as long to do X in fos as it
> does to do X in mediawik.

Actually, Mediawiki is preferable from my pont of view--there are no
FOSWiki packages for Gentoo, so I was originally looking at writing
an ebuild before I even got to the skinning stage.  Mediawiki doesn't
have that problem.

Which version of Mediawiki were you looking at setting up?  I'd
like to keep my testing environment consistent, if possible.

> How are you doing menus on the website? I see the left column - static is fine,
> but I have also collected two menuing tools that are pure-css and really slick.
> One is the traditional fly-out (either horiz or ver) menus (w/sub-menus) - the
> other is a collapsible tree like a (tree mode) directory listing in konqueror
> file manager. Both can be used as the main menu for a site, or just included as
> minor elements where saving space is needed or desired.

Those are both nice menus (and if you don't mind my swiping the code,
I may some day find a use for them somewhere else), but I do have a 
reason for keeping to static links in this case--it's that pesky Lynx 
compatibility again.  I want to make things easy for people intent on 
setting up Trinity as the very first graphical environment on their brand-
new Linux box, even if that perhaps isn't strictly necessary in this day 
and age. ;)

> E. just give me a shout and let me know what you need and I'll help
> any way I can.

I'm intending to do the Bugzilla skin this weekend, then look at the
wiki next week.  I may have some questions for you then.

E. Liddell