Things that could be updated

[xxMATTGxx]

They could just ignore whoever is giving the commands because old pages are more important than a new site version. The current version is what your target audience is viewing, they couldn't give a crap about some new version which should never of been talked about as you'll only get a re-occurrence of when V6 came out.


That's exactly what I was referring to. If you need to be paid to develop V7 then something is incredibly wrong. People can work voluntary to develop website versions, as long as they enjoy it. It shouldn't take too long either. And you didn't post a reason for outdated content because there is no reason to let your current content become outdated, it's a really bad idea


You were anticipating an August release with a (what would be less than) 60% complete site? What :S

Are you crazy? What I am saying is the people who are working on V7 and doing the coding don't do it full time. They have jobs, one works for an airline and well the other works for an ISP and then they get help from a few others about some stuff. I am saying if they were doing it full time coding wise and was being paid for it - Because that is when they would be working full time as they wouldn't need the other jobs then the whole V7 status would be a different story.

You were anticipating an August release with a (what would be less than) 60% complete site?

Complications made it so it didn't happen.

[Martin]

V7 was scheduled for August and as a content department our deadline for all pages to be complete for V7 was brought ahead to an earlier than anticipated date so we dropped everything to get all the pages done, following that we've bided our time expecting imminent release of V7, obviously this didn't happen and now V6 pages are getting outdated. I'll look into getting some of the time sensitive pages done up.

As far as how complete is V7? Around 60%

Why couldn't current pages continue to be updated whilst new ones were being made? Surely there will be department pages on v7 which I presume are complete if your deadline was so early on? If not then surely they are part of the v7 stuff too since they will feature on it. Perhaps a staff member should have been assigned the role of keeping the current site in fresh condition whilst other pages were being worked on?

[MKR&*42]

They could just ignore whoever is giving the commands because old pages are more important than a new site version. The current version is what your target audience is viewing, they couldn't give a crap about some new version which should never of been talked about as you'll only get a re-occurrence of when V6 came out.

We could quite easily ignore it and resign/be fired, but that wouldn't solve the issue of the outdated pages. An (Assistant) Manager has to give out the perms and if they refuse then we can't do anything. As Will said above, it looks like we might be able to improve some of them soon.

[GommeInc]

Are you crazy? What I am saying is the people who are working on V7 and doing the coding don't do it full time. They have jobs, one works for an airline and well the other works for an ISP and then they get help from a few others about some stuff. I am saying if they were doing it full time coding wise and was being paid for it - Because that is when they would be working full time as they wouldn't need the other jobs then the whole V7 status would be a different story.

Complications made it so it didn't happen.

It doesn't really answer the problem. V6 took ages to come out and that wasn't technically superior or visually amazing, not worth the wait at least. V7 must be worth waiting for if people need to be working full-time and be paid to do it. Otherwise, you've lined yourself up for what would be a really mediocre release like the last version. A welcome change, but no-one really understanding why it took so long.

And to save your hide you could of just not mentioned V7 or given a release date. Only give one when the development is finished, and the remaining work is simply basic content stuff.

We could quite easily ignore it and resign/be fired, but that wouldn't solve the issue of the outdated pages. An (Assistant) Manager has to give out the perms and if they refuse then we can't do anything. As Will said above, it looks like we might be able to improve some of them soon.

Not a very good AGM then :/ Why do you need to make new pages for V7 anyway? You could just alter V6 pages so they work immediately off the bat for V7. Most sites do this :/

[xxMATTGxx]

It doesn't really answer the problem. V6 took ages to come out and that wasn't technically superior or visually amazing, not worth the wait at least. V7 must be worth waiting for if people need to be working full-time and be paid to do it. Otherwise, you've lined yourself up for what would be a really mediocre release like the last version. A welcome change, but no-one really understanding why it took so long.

And to save your hide you could of just not mentioned V7 or given a release date. Only give one when the development is finished, and the remaining work is simply basic content stuff.

What problem? That content isn't being updated? Okay V7 shouldn't be used as that reason now but fair enough if it was being used as a reason back in August. It answers the problem in terms of why it hasn't been released now. Working on it full time = More gets done and on a quicker basis.

V6 was worked on by David alone which is also why it took a while to come out.

V7 is worth it because it will make it a hell of a lot easier to maintain and manage as the current system is confusing, outdated and complicated. No that isn't a dig at David as I know that was his first CMS and he was still learning etc etc but it is time to move on which is why we started with the V7 project.

It takes time because it can't be worked on full time and it's hard to get developers working on free projects like this.

[MKR&*42]

It doesn't really answer the problem. V6 took ages to come out and that wasn't technically superior or visually amazing, not worth the wait at least. V7 must be worth waiting for if people need to be working full-time and be paid to do it. Otherwise, you've lined yourself up for what would be a really mediocre release like the last version. A welcome change, but no-one really understanding why it took so long.

And to save your hide you could of just not mentioned V7 or given a release date. Only give one when the development is finished, and the remaining work is simply basic content stuff.


Not a very good AGM then :/ Why do you need to make new pages for V7 anyway? You could just alter V6 pages so they work immediately off the bat for V7. Most sites do this :/

That is essentially what happened to quite a few (quite a lot of C + P of some pages with a sentence or 2 altered). There were a "handful" of new pages created though.

I have found it quite bizarre that we continue to update v7 pages but not v6 thinking about it...

[GommeInc]

It takes time because it can't be worked on full time and it's hard to get developers working on free projects like this.

It's a fair enough reason, but you should of looked back at V6 and not mentioned V7 until it was ready and only minor tweaks were needed.

That said, shouldn't content staff be continuing to edit V6 until V7 is structurally ready?

That is essentially what happened to quite a few (quite a lot of C + P of some pages with a sentence or 2 altered). There were a "handful" of new pages created though.

I have found it quite bizarre that we continue to update v7 pages but not v6 thinking about it...

It's strange you've not been given the permissions to use the new V7 pages on V6. There seems to be a lack of communication somewhere.

[xxMATTGxx]

It's a fair enough reason, but you should of looked back at V6 and not mentioned V7 until it was ready and only minor tweaks were needed.

That said, shouldn't content staff be continuing to edit V6 until V7 is structurally ready?


It's strange you've not been given the permissions to use the new V7 pages on V6. There seems to be a lack of communication somewhere.

I never said they couldn't edit V6. They were stopped during August to make sure we could focus on getting content onto V7 as at the time we thought it was all systems go for release. It made sense at the time to mention V7 as we was having problems with V6 which we some what still have today and decided to inform people that we was working on a new site which would solve a lot of the issues that was occurring.

Plus, it would have been mentioned to the public anyway when we asked department managers for feature ideas in what they wanted changed at the back end to make it easier for them and for their staff.

[GommeInc]

I never said they couldn't edit V6. They were stopped during August to make sure we could focus on getting content onto V7 as at the time we thought it was all systems go for release. It made sense at the time to mention V7 as we was having problems with V6 which we some what still have today and decided to inform people that we was working on a new site which would solve a lot of the issues that was occurring.

Plus, it would have been mentioned to the public anyway when we asked department managers for feature ideas in what they wanted changed at the back end to make it easier for them and for their staff.

So why give a really specific time and date when it wasn't ready? https://twitter.com/MattC48/status/234553891486851072

Yeah the public could know of a V7, but when they do not know, especially that specific.

[xxMATTGxx]

So why give a really specific time and date when it wasn't ready? https://twitter.com/MattC48/status/234553891486851072

Yeah the public could know of a V7, but when they do not know, especially that specific.

That was a mistake made by us and we realised that when a complication occurred in a very short period before that date/time. I won't go into detail as I'm not a fan of blaming people.