[Vit-discuss] Now, where were we?

Curt Hibbs curt at hibbs.com
Fri Feb 18 13:22:16 EST 2005

Wow... good summary!

One thing that I would add is that we need setup some kind of working
relationship with the Japanese group that (unknown to us) started something
similar last month.


why the lucky stiff wrote:
> Hi, everybody.  Consider the wealth of discussion that has been rolling
> down the snowhill for the last few months.  It's a raging and
> incongruous boulder.  Let's size ite up.
> Here are what I consider to be the essentials of the discussion so far:
> * The quintessential ruby-talk thread is the "Best ways to accelerate
> Ruby's popularity," which lived out its existence for a month or so,
> throughout January.
> <http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/vframe.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/124
> 596?124484-128974>
> * I think the thread (and others which spawned from it at that time)
> really got moving when Ben Giddings stripped ruby-lang.org down to its
> essentials and everyone started thinking about what those essentials
> were exactly.
> <http://rubytalk.com/127081>
> * I posted a mockup of a hypothetical Ruby.org.  The comments are
> especially useful, as the discussion is primarily centered on the page
> layout.
> <http://redhanded.hobix.com/cult/rubyorgMockup.html>
> * Useful criticism from gab: <http://rubytalk.com/127255>
> * A related topic deals with an official Ruby manual, which I think is
> very pertinent to our work here.  John Long's designs were posted on
> RedHanded in early January.
> <http://redhanded.hobix.com/cult/rdocWithoutFramesAConcept.html>
> <http://redhanded.hobix.com/rdoc/>
> * The idea of giving an official look, ruby-lang.org subdomains, or a
> common header to community sites has been brought up a lot.
> <http://rubytalk.com/127315>
> I think the prevailing feeling about this has been that such an umbrella
> might be too much work to keep aloof.
> <http://rubytalk.com/127674>
> But, a good point.
> <http://rubytalk.com/127431>
> * Discussion of the more dilapidated parts of ruby-lang.org.  I think we
> can all agree that its important that ruby-lang.org be up-to-date and
> reflect the hectic activity that truly is Ruby.
> <http://rubytalk.com/127438>
> * Another recurring topic is the state of ruby-doc.org.  There is a
> prevailing notion that ruby-doc requires closer attention.  Which is
> very interesting, considering that RubyGarden has avoided scrutiny, even
> though it suffers from many of its own issues.
> <http://rubytalk.com/127285>
> * Other related ruby-talk threads:
> <http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/vframe.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/127

vit-discuss mailing list
vit-discuss at rubyforge.org
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.8 - Release Date: 2/14/2005

More information about the vit-discuss mailing list