XSF Editor Team - 2022-10-13

  1. goffi

    Hi there. Just for the record: recent protoXEPs all give a 404, is it known? I kind of remember that there is slight delay for site update, but I'm not sure.

  2. goffi

    (the HTML built version)

  3. goffi

    actually both xml and html.

  4. pep.

    Maybe that's because of yesterday's PR merge. I guess it should be back soon?

  5. jonas’

    goffi, I pushed, apparently the pull did not work?

  6. goffi

    I have no idea how it's done actually. Just seing the 404 as end-user. Indeed the whole thing seems complicated, specially after reading your email.

  7. goffi

    could not XSF pay somebody to work on automation?

  8. Kev

    A few years ago Board were going to get someone to work on it, but it didn't come to anything.

  9. Kev

    I'd have thought paying someone to sort it out would not be stupid if we can agree what actual requirements are, etc., and no-one steps forward to volunteer. It feels a bit uncomfortable paying for someone to automate bits of the Editor role when the role itself is unpaid, but I'd have thought whatever it takes to keep the XSF functioning makes sense; the Editor role is vital and jonas’ has been doing a good job of it for an age.

  10. goffi

    indeed. Can't the paid person be somebody from XSF (like… the editor, which is the best person to know the requirements), if somebody is willing to of course.

  11. goffi

    ?

  12. emus

    > goffi: > 2022-10-13 12:24 (GMT+02:00) > could not XSF pay somebody to work on automation? +1

  13. emus

    > Kev: > 2022-10-13 12:27 (GMT+02:00) > I'd have thought paying someone to sort it out would not be stupid if we can agree what actual requirements are, etc., and no-one steps forward to volunteer. It feels a bit uncomfortable paying for someone to automate bits of the Editor role when the role itself is unpaid, but I'd have thought whatever it takes to keep the XSF functioning makes sense; the Editor role is vital and jonas’ has been doing a good job of it for an age. Maybe we should change both of it to some extend. And even its unfair, from what has been stated its too important to hope someone just does it. We can also ask if everyone would be okay to make an expectional approach this time and discuss new setups in the future. IMO