Re: Shouldn't the sourceforge stuff be deleted now?

[KHMan]

On 9/23/2010 5:45 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Mark Summerfield writes:
>
> > Now that Ludovic has migrated lout to savannah, shouldn't we get rid of
> > the sourceforge pages?
>
> Yes, though there may be valuable content on the wiki, which should be
> eventually migrated.  Any ideas?

It should be fairly easy to reuse if the target follows wiki 
format, else converting to something else would be a one-off job 
-- which ought to be reasonable since there isn't a lot of pages. 
I have slightly older tar'ed snapshots in wiki source format too.

A sensible long-term plan is needed for whatever new website that 
you guys may want to do. It'll probably be rarely updated, but 
should support convenient incremental updates by multiple people. 
Of course, we have seen in the past that refresh rates leaves much 
to be desired, and initial enthusiasm by incoming volunteers is 
sometimes not translated into action or long-term action.

The only thing holding back zapping SF is that there may be a few 
users who still want MinGW Win32 binaries. The last of that 
release (3.38) was not done by me, I did it last in 2007, but 
there was at one time calls by users who still want that. I would 
point users to Cygwin, which compiles lout pretty much 
out-of-the-box; I don't plan to compile any more MinGW binaries 
myself.

So pick a sensible website scheme first and someone needs to do 
all the initial stuff. Whoever is championing this Savannah thing 
will need to put in the miles and push, since in the past it was 
really hard to come by steady manpower for the SF website.

--
Cheers,
Kein-Hong Man (esq.)
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia