[Bf-committers] New blog: code.blender.org (proposal)
dfelinto at gmail.com
Thu Nov 11 04:20:05 CET 2010
I loved the idea.
Not an aggregator but a coletive blog.
I see myself using it to (1) help demonstrating new features (what we
sometimes end up doing in the release log), (2) thinking out loud (sketching
out ideas, sharing some thoughts on the future of some areas of BGE/Blender
(3) replying to questions on how to use this of that feature (instead of
doing that in emails / irc).
It doesn't have to be structured and organized as wiki, so it can be pretty
easy to add news there.
Great idea Ton,
2010/11/9 Christopher Allan Webber <cwebber at dustycloud.org>
> I think that a code.blender.org aggregator would be nice. But it would
> also be nice to hear Ton and some of the currently non-blogging devs
> start to blog too. Even if they were just aggregated as well on
> planetblender, that would make sense.
> However, I could see the reason for having two separate
> aggregators/planets if people really want them. I mean, users/devs are
> separated on irc channels, and that works out well. And for those
> people who are both artists and devs, they could always use tag
> filtered feeds to distinguish between one and the other.
> But yeah, I think the main thing which Ton has correctly pointed out is,
> there are a lot of interesting things happening in blender coder
> devland which aren't being blogged. So the most important thing is
> seeing that get blogged!
> Bassam Kurdali <bkurdali at freefactory.org> writes:
> > The only issue with the current aggregators is that they are not
> > restricted - or even exhaustive - to the code/coder related blogs. This
> > is arguably something that could be added to one or the other of them
> > (increasing the number of blogs subscribed and making sure there is a
> > 'code' tag filter)
> > Ton's point of providing a blog to coders who currently don't have/
> > don't want to maintain their own, is a valid one.
> > Cheers
> > Bassam
> > On Mon, 2010-11-08 at 12:36 -0800, Alex Combas wrote:
> >> 2010/11/8 Gustav Göransson <gustav.goransson at gmail.com>
> >> >
> >> > Can't it be both?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> I can't speak for anyone, but myself so its really just my opinion.
> >> But I think it is wiser to be one or the other, and I'll tell you why.
> >> Blogs are picked up by aggregators, but aggregators do not pick up other
> >> aggregators.
> >> This is why Blendernation and Plantblender do not aggregate each other,
> >> would just be total duplication, every
> >> interesting post would show up at least twice on each site, maybe more,
> >> would be very annoying for everyone.
> >> So if code.blender.org starts to aggregate content which is already
> >> aggregated by Blendernation and Planetblender
> >> then I do not think that those sites would pick up code.blender.org,
> >> also I think that people who are already
> >> subscribed to those two aggregators will not see much benefit to
> >> to a third aggregator.
> >> So on the other hand, if code.blender.org keeps its content unique (not
> >> hosting content already published on other blogs which
> >> are already being aggregated by other portals) then people will
> subscribe to
> >> code.blender.org for its own sake, and it will
> >> likely be picked up by both Blendernation and Planetblender thus
> >> it's reach to a much
> >> broader audience than it could do on its own.
> >> Just my opinion, I dont speak for anyone involved in any of these sites.
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Bf-committers mailing list
> >> Bf-committers at blender.org
> >> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bf-committers mailing list
> > Bf-committers at blender.org
> > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
More information about the Bf-committers