[pygtk] Is the PyGTK website up to date? (also the tutorial)

[Rafael Villar Burke]

John Anon wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 5:10 AM, Gian Mario Tagliaretti
> <gianmt at gnome.org> wrote:
>   
>> On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 6:43 AM, John Anon <argo785 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>     
>>> The PyGTK website's "Latest News" most recent item is from March,
>>> 2007. But this list seems quite active. Is the site simply out of
>>> date?
>>>       
>> It's simply a lack of manpower, the website is on SVN  as well:
>> http://svn.gnome.org/viewvc/pygtk-web/
>>     
>
> Ah. Interesting. Some templating is in use (ex.
> `<!--stp:include('newsitems.src') -->`), and files are mostly written
> in straight html. I see that the newsitems file is in Python with html
> inside triple-quoted strings. Hm.
>
> It would seem to me that the site would be sight easier to manage if
> it were just a wiki. I bet this would solve the manpower issue.
>   
The templating system there is extremely simple. What we'd need though
is having a script that automatically updates the news file whenever a
release happens. IMHO, using a wiki is just a way to have something more
to maintain.
> Is live.gnome.org a wiki? Because [the PyGTK page
> there](http://live.gnome.org/PyGTK) seems like a nice and
> easy-to-update homepage for PyGTK... Hm. Is there any content on the
> pygtk homepage that isn't on this live.gnome page? Is there any real
> reason for keeping the old website around when you've got
> <http://live.gnome.org/PyGTK>?
>   
>>> BTW, could you please point me to the source of the tutorial? I looked
>>> where [the ViewCVS link points
>>>       
>> pygtk-docs module:
>> http://svn.gnome.org/viewvc/pygtk-docs/
>>     
>
> Thanks. Ouch. I see that the tutorial is in docbook. Ooof. :( Why not
> just transfer it to the wiki? Would make it **way** easier to keep up
> to date.
>   
Using a wiki for long term documentation, while eases the initial steps
to contribute, is a maintenance nightmare, as canonical documents like
this should be carefully reviewed and should have an uniform style. It
also makes much more difficult the release of other versions like PDF
and other formats (devhelp).

Also, the existing markup is quite easy to use, as it's not full swing
docbook, but a trimmed down version of it called gtkdoc, used for other
gnome and gtk+ documentation.

Regards,

Rafael Villar Burke