Re: gnome-office website (was Re: We're removed from FC2 ?)

From: Jody Goldberg (jody_at_gnome.org)
Date: Thu Feb 05 2004 - 13:53:46 EST

  • Next message: made_at_nakula.rvs.uni-bielefeld.de: "test"

    On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 11:44:41PM +0000, Oliver Burnett-Hall wrote:
    > On Thu, 2004-01-29 at 04:47, Jody Goldberg wrote:
    > > On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 12:13:36AM +0100, Marc Maurer wrote:
    > > > For a start, we should update the GOffice homepage, which has this
    > > > "Gnome Office is actually a meta-project" nonsense on it. Then, we
    > > > should become a 'real' office suit, with a select group of high
    > > > quality _office_ applications.
    > >
    > > Amen.
    > > It boils down to resources. If someone can step up to the plate and
    > > work on the website it would be a huge help.
    >
    > I'm willing to do this - I've got some ideas for updating/redoing the
    > existing site and have made a start on this. I should have something
    > semi-working in the next week or so.
    >
    > Couple of questions:
    >
    > (1) Where in cvs can I find the existing web pages? I've had a look
    > but got annoyed with the ultra-slow web-cvs interface before I could
    > find anything.

    module gw-web

    has the pages for the gnome-office site.
    Gnumeric's pages live in module gnomeweb-wml
        www.gnome.org/projects/gnumeric/

    Do you have a cvs account ?

    > (2) Which apps should be considered to be part of gnome office these
    > days?

    the defacto set right now are
    - abi
    - gnumeric
    - gnome-db

    Apps like conglomerate that have expressed a desire to join, and
    have followed up by trying to use some of the gnome office libs seem
    like good candidates.

    > (3) Does anyone have any material about the office project (from talks
    > or anything) that I can recycle?

    Here are some gnumeric centric talks from last summer
        http://www.gnome.org/~jody/ols-2003
        http://www.gnome.org/~jody/guadec4-dublin/



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Feb 05 2004 - 13:57:24 EST