From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Thu Oct 30 15:04:10 2003 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list bpfk-announce); Thu, 30 Oct 2003 15:04:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.22) id 1AFLpq-0000PB-BJ for bpfk-announce@lojban.org; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 15:04:10 -0800 Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 15:04:10 -0800 To: bpfk-announce@lojban.org Subject: [bpfk-announce] Re: PHPBB conversion? Message-ID: <20031030230410.GD26692@digitalkingdom.org> References: <20031029234425.GD32004@lojban.org> <20031030224511.40918.qmail@web41901.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031030224511.40918.qmail@web41901.mail.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i From: Robin Lee Powell X-archive-position: 14 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: bpfk-announce-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org Errors-to: bpfk-announce-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: bpfk-announce@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-list: bpfk-announce On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 02:45:11PM -0800, Jorge Llamb?as wrote: > --- Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > If people could please tell me how important it is to have the > > old PHPBB stuff moved over to the Tiki, I'd appreciate it. I'm > > going to have to write the conversion code if that's important > > to people. > > I don't think it's that important, as long as it remains > accessible for reference. OK. I won't bother then. > > Some indication that you've looked at the BPFK area on the Tiki > > would be nice, too. > > I like your grouping things into sections, it makes things > clearer. Thanks. > The sections you chose are similar to what I had for myself. The > main difference is that I had numbers and indirect referers > together with gadri, all as "determiners", and lerfu with > pro-sumti, since I don't think a section on mathematics is > particularly useful. Ah, see, whereas in my case, if I do any actual non-administrative BPFK work at all, it will be WRT mathematics more likely than not. > In any case, would it be too cumbersome to automatically create a > page for each cmavo with the current ma'oste definition? That > would be a much better starting point for new definitions (if > needed) than a clean slate, I think, and less intimidating. Also, > we can more easily see in each case how significant any change > being proposed is. Hmmm. Why not just link to the jbovlaste definition? I'd prefer for a proposal page to have *everything* needed on it, including proposed cmavo changes. What I can do is create initial pages for each section which list the selma'o and have jbovlaste links for each member. > Is there a new policy on shepherding? Nick didn't want more than > two topics per shepherd, but that seems unrealistic unless you > manage to coerce a lot more people into shepherding duty. There is currently no such policy, and I have no plans to implement one. -Robin -- Me: http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** I'm a *male* Robin. "Constant neocortex override is the only thing that stops us all from running out and eating all the cookies." -- Eliezer Yudkowsky http://www.lojban.org/ *** .i cimo'o prali .ui