pcplantdb

[Chad Knepp <pyg@galatea.org>]

Thanks for checking it out, but I'm not really available to handle bug
reports right now.  I see the current public release as a crude
prototype.  If you spend much time at all with it you could generate a
HUGE list of bugs, quirks, and clunks. 

Chad


Richard Morris writes:
 > One other minor point:
 > 
 > Not to keen on 'Cultural Notes:' 'Cultivation Notes' is
 > closer to what it is and at some point we may want
 > to add notes from a particular Culture and 'Curtural Notes'
 > would be an appropriate heading for that.
 > 
 > Rich
 > 
 > --
 > Plants for a Future: 7000 useful plants
 > Web:   http://www.pfaf.org/ same as http://www.comp.leeds.ac.uk/pfaf/
 > Post:  1 Lerryn View, Lerryn, Lostwithiel, Cornwall, PL22 0QJ
 > Tel:  01208 872 963 / 0845 458 4719  
 > Email: webmaster@pfaf.org
 > PFAF electronic mailing list http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pfaf
>From webmaster@pfaf.org  Fri Mar 21 19:30:40 2003
Return-Path: <webmaster@pfaf.org>
Delivered-To: pcplantdb@lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from mail1.srv.poptel.org.uk (mail1.srv.poptel.org.uk [213.55.4.13])
        by happyhouse.metalab.unc.edu (Postfix) with SMTP id 7980720011
        for <pcplantdb@lists.ibiblio.org>;
        Fri, 21 Mar 2003 19:30:40 -0500 (EST)
Received: (qmail 53159 invoked by uid 0); 22 Mar 2003 00:23:36 -0000
Received: from host213-120-39-53.webport.bt.net (HELO pfaf.org)
        (213.120.39.53)
        by mail1.srv.poptel.org.uk with SMTP; 22 Mar 2003 00:23:36 -0000
Message-ID: <3E7B392B.3000109@pfaf.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 16:09:15 +0000
From: Richard Morris <webmaster@pfaf.org>
Organization: Plants For A Future
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.3b) Gecko/20030210
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: pcplantdb <pcplantdb@lists.ibiblio.org>
References: 
<Pine.LNX.4.44.0303211417140.8393-100000@cslin-gps.csunix.comp.leeds.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: 
<Pine.LNX.4.44.0303211417140.8393-100000@cslin-gps.csunix.comp.leeds.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [pcplantdb] Re: attribution
X-BeenThere: pcplantdb@lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: pcplantdb@lists.ibiblio.org
List-Id: <pcplantdb.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/pcplantdb>,
        <mailto:pcplantdb-request@lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/pcplantdb>
List-Post: <mailto:pcplantdb@lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa@lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/pcplantdb>,
        <mailto:pcplantdb-request@lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 00:30:41 -0000

Chad wrote:
 > You may also recall that I complained a little about the attribution
 > (by) clause of the CC license.  It reads to me, and seems like a hell
 > of a lot of work, that virtually every word changed must be tracked
 > and attributed to their respective authors.  I've started to implement
 > this functionality but it seems absolutely nuts.

I guess the group need some more discussion on this.

Q1 What sort of attribution do we want on the project.
Possible choices:
        1. Complete attribution, so each bit can be attributed.
        2. Per Plant Attribution: so contributers to each plant
                can be listed.
        3. Whole database: attribution.
        4. No attribution: everyone is anonymous.

My preference would be 1 because
        - its quite fun to do
        - we would be quite interested in approaching
          other contributors to find out if they
          would be willing to let pfaf use their
          edits etc. in our own, possibly commercial, DB.
          This type of attribution would make that easy for us.

2 would be preferable over 3 and not at all keen on 4.


Q2 Version control

I feel DB would need sort of version control system.
At the very least to stop some script kiddy just deleting
all the data. We get quite a few 'You Suck' messages added
to our readers comments so chance of corruption is high.

Q3 Edit style
        I've mentioned before that I see some problems with
        allowing free edits. Problem is especially with
        medicinal uses in that some one could add some false
        info to DB with possible health risk. Attribution
        and only allowing additions could help protect
        the projects name.

        In my ideal world I'd really like some review process
        so that edits are checked by a review board to
        preserve accuracy.

        On the reflection this is a bit over the top.
        And wikii style free edits is probably OK.
        (as long as there is version control and some way
        of tracking changes, & restoring backups)

What do people think of these issues.

        Rich

--
Plants for a Future: 7000 useful plants
Web:   http://www.pfaf.org/ same as http://www.comp.leeds.ac.uk/pfaf/
Post:  1 Lerryn View, Lerryn, Lostwithiel, Cornwall, PL22 0QJ
Tel:     01208 872 963 / 0845 458 4719  
Email: webmaster@pfaf.org
PFAF electronic mailing list http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pfaf