[webteam] Screenshots on Client Page

[Susan Stewart]

Sander Devrieze wrote:
> 2008/3/2, Susan Stewart <HedgeMage at binaryredneck.net>:
<snip>
>> Interesting...Gallery2 integration has come a long way since last I
>> tried it.  At least theming wouldn't be an issue.  Still, tracking
>> security issues and separately updating another app adds some
>> work.
> 
> That's true. But isn't that the same for the image.module of Drupal? 
> ...modules also can have security issue as you know.

Yes, but thanks to our use of SiteDoc and Update modules, updates to
Drupal core, themes, and modules, are tracked for us.  We are notified
of updates, and when we apply them the changes are recorded so we have
an audit trail should something go wrong.

>> You never answered my second question...what features does Gallery2
>> offer that makes it preferable to image.module ?
> 
> I don't have experience with image.module, so I can't compare, but 
> this is what I like: 
>   * image block in Drupal

Check.

>   * slideshow

Check (some types require separate modules)

>   * auto-resizing

Check

>   * navigation in albums

Check

>   * descriptions of pictures & albums

Check

>   * userfriendly interface for managing the albums and pcitures

Check

>   * lots of modules available:
> http://codex.gallery2.org/Gallery2:Modules

Using image module, all images are nodes, any other Drupal module that
acts on nodes can act on our images, whether we are adding information
with CCK, organizing and displaying with views, reviewing with audit
module, rating with fivestar, or any other number of things.  There are
also a few modules that directly support image (though, we are, at most,
displaying some screenshots, so none of that should be necessary.)

I think we are talking about different things, Sander.  Your argument
seems to be "Gallery2 is really cool, so we should use it".  That's all
well and good, but consider the scope of the project.  Image does
everything we need for *this project* and then some, while adding almost
no maintenance overhead to the site.

We don't want to try all the Gallery2 modules and see how cool they are.
 We want the site up and working with as little continuing need for our
attention as possible, so that we can divert our time and energy back to
JEPs, advocacy, and other tasks.

On that score, I'm not yet convinced that we even need image.module...
we'll see what happens as the conversation goes on.  The biggest danger
of transparent development for this type of site is scope creep.  It is
tempting to just hang another module, feature, or content section on
every time someone has an idea, until the whole project topples over.
We can't do that and have a functional, maintainable site.

Susan