[sword-devel] [OT] just join, testing only

[Matthew Talbert]

Chris,
You wrote this quite a while ago:

Jonathan Morgan wrote:
> This kind of announcement really raises in my mind the question "How
> much does a piece of software require to be listed on the CrossWire
> pages as a project? (such as on the main CrossWire page and the Wiki
> sidebar)"  Not all initial concepts that are displayed here reach that
> stage, but I certainly think that BPBible has reached it.  Is there
> any policy, or is it more along the lines of "Ask and you will
> receive?"

I think we ought actually to move in the opposite direction from what
you suggest and weed out software that is inappropriate to the CrossWire
front page. In particular, I'd like to remove dead projects and projects
affliated with neither Sword nor CrossWire. I would probably cut out
everything but the actual active CrossWire projects (Sword, SwordWeb,
FlashCards, etc.) and the major frontends. We can create a more
extensive frontends page WITHIN the Sword website, where we can do a
more extensive breakdown of all the frontends, current and obsolete, for
all platforms. This should really not be considered a decrease in
exposure since the CrossWire main page really shouldn't get much traffic
compared to the Sword pages.

Regarding the Wiki, I think we need a front page redesign more than
anything. An absurdly long list of frontends, most of whose Wiki pages
are completely blank, is poor Wiki layout. When we set it up, of course,
everything was blank and we didn't necessarily know how the Wiki would
grow. But it's apparent by now that info is never going to come for
certain frontends. We can give a full listing of frontend Wiki links on
the front page, though (for those that actually have pages).

--Chris

DM wrote this:

> Regarding the Wiki, I think we need a front page redesign more than
> anything. An absurdly long list of frontends, most of whose Wiki pages
> are completely blank, is poor Wiki layout. When we set it up, of
> course,
> everything was blank and we didn't necessarily know how the Wiki would
> grow. But it's apparent by now that info is never going to come for
> certain frontends. We can give a full listing of frontend Wiki links
> on
> the front page, though (for those that actually have pages).

Ditto.

The wiki is fairly useless as it stands. Just clicking around is a
frustrating exercise in finding a page that actually has contents.

What if the "sidebar" were changed to have one set of entries for
users and one set for developers.

The user set would have a small number of links: FAQ, Applications.
The Applications page would list actively maintained projects. If
those have active wiki entries, that would be referenced. Otherwise,
the appropriate website would be referenced. Inactive/orphaned/dead/
not-yet-1.0 applications would be another page reachable from the
bottom of the Applications page.

The developer set also would be limited: FAQ, Projects.
The FAQ does not exist yet. Projects would be like Applications, but
reference the home of the project and perhaps have it's own wiki.
Pages such as for BibleTime are currently useless and should be deleted.


The thread is Announcing FireBible 0.5.1 - GPLed Firefox font-end
(sorry I don't know where the archives are for a link)

It appears that the original idea was to have parts for users and for
developers. Not sure where the development-only came from.

Also, it looks like the BPBible guys asked for a front page notice and
were turned down.

Matthew