[Noisebridge-discuss] Access to the calendar?

[Ani Niow]

The jukebox is kind of an odd situation, from what I know of it,
documentation is limited and its changed hands so many times since I've been
involved here. I don't know the first thing about using it since I'm not
exactly sure where to look for it. I imagine a calendar would operate a bit
differently since it is something that would be (presumably) on the main
page or at least linked from the main page.
Given the wiki is pretty active I don't think usability would be a problem
for this. I at least think its a worthwhile experiment and I'd love to give
it a go.



-Ani



On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Josh Myer <josh at joshisanerd.com> wrote:

>
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 01:31:14PM -0700, Ani Niow wrote:
> > The calendar currently on SWARM looks like it only displays the date and
> not
> > what's happening on that date, maybe that's why it fell into disuse. I'm
> > liking the extensibility of the Kenyu73 one and am really surprised that
> we
> > don't have one like that already. Google Calendar is cumbersome and it
> > depends on one person to grant privileges which is an unnecessary burden
>
> FWIW, there are currently 8 people who can add people to the calendar,
> and, when they add them, those peole can add people to the calendar.
> In fact, yesterday, there were only 6, and Skory added two more admins
> this morning.  It does suck that you need to have a google account to
> use it, but that's pretty common for most web services out there.
>
> I honestly don't use gCal for anything but the noisebridge calendar.
> The only reason I have a google account is to use gReader (and, more
> recently, gCode, because there isn't a reliable and responsive SVN
> hosting provider out there).
>
> It would be great to get something on the wiki, but I'd be hesistant
> to use it because no one seems interested in committing to being the
> wiki maintainer.  For instance: the occasional requests for new
> filetypes on the wiki, which never get handled.  Personally, I would
> move the wiki over to PBwiki or some such, and put the files up in
> dropbox or some other service.  There's something to be said for
> externalizing maintenance, even if it comes at the cost of some
> flexiblity.
>
> > IMO, especially when we have an entire wiki at our disposal, not to
> mention
> > not everyone (like me) uses Google calendar.
> > I'd be willing to take the reins and experiment with it if I can get
> access
> > to install the plugin, hint hint...
>
> Not to pick on Ani, but the fileserver/jukebox experience should serve
> as a cautionary tale here: without some form of responsibility, things
> won't get fixed.  When things fail, infrastructure people depend on
> disappears for a while, and it needs to be restored.  Using a free
> external service puts the niggly bits of restoration on the provider
> (even though it's free), who is likely to take care of it, even when
> they're really busy with other projects.  And then there's the
> less-niggly things, like adding new users, updating events, etc, which
> can be done by just about anyone (since the service is for Normals).
> This is part of why I've been handing out admin privileges to the gCal
> like candy: it distributes responsiblity for the non-technical
> maintenance, so I'm never a bottleneck.
> --
> Josh Myer  650.248.3796
>  josh at joshisanerd.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20090423/e26d45ff/attachment-0003.html>