[sf-lug] Volunteers to actually update the web page? ... (was: Re: SF-LUG December Mtg)

[Michael Paoli]

Well, it is after all, a Linux Users' Group
$ curl -s https://www.sf-lug.org/ | grep -i '<title'
<TITLE>San Francisco Linux Users' Group</TITLE>
$
At last count, 240 members:
http://linuxmafia.com/pipermail/sf-lug/2024q4/016060.html
Maybe someone(s) would want to volunteer to edit the web page.
Not exactly rocket science ... know how to use ssh?  sudo?
An editor such as vi?
https://www.mpaoli.net/~michael/unix/vi/
Enough to know at least how to edit some text in an HTML page?
Maybe even some commands like cp - "just in case".
Yeah, been over this before, even fairly recently:
http://linuxmafia.com/pipermail/sf-lug/2024q3/016038.html
Just because I happen to (also) have access, doesn't mean
I should do everything - have more than enough LUG and other
stuff to keep me busy.  You'd think maybe some others would
step up and actually do the needed/wanted.
Or ... maybe I should switch and do the comparatively easy
stuff like editing a web page, and someone else could do the
more challenging stuff like maintaining/fixing/rescuing hosts/servers
needed to keep the list and web site going. ;-)
http://linuxmafia.com/pipermail/sf-lug/2015q1/010663.html

Oh, and I think Rick Moen's been asking about someone else
to volunteer to reasonably well host and run the SF-LUG list for ...
well over two decades now.  I did also mention long time
back that I could potentially host the list - and most notably
under the sf-lug.org domain ... but folks basically said "no thanks".
And, at this point in time, for better and/or worse, that would now
be under Mailman 3, rather than Mailman 2 ... which would also
rather well take care of some of the significant deliverability issues
folks tend to repeatedly directly and/or indirectly complain about.
There's also a test list on that host, for folks that may want to take
that for a spin:
https://lists.balug.org/mailman3/postorius/lists/balug-test.lists.balug.org/
"Of course" do also have a (non-trivial) plan to address that on the
existing list host - yet another project ... and I don't exactly see
a line of volunteers to work out how to well do that and other relevant
bits on that host/server ... yeah, not so trival (and yes, I've worked out
how to get that done, but will take some time and resources to get
that all completed ... and most notably also while optimizing for
continuity and availability, while also doing much quite overdue
updates along the way).

On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 7:43 AM aaronco36 <aaronco36 at sdf.org> wrote:
> Quoting the still current SF-LUG webpage www.sf-lug.org
> (current as of this writing) :
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> * virtual remains:
> https://meet.jit.si/sf-lug.org
> Browser: one will need sufficiently recent version of, e.g.
> Chromium, Chrome, or possibly Firefox - in any case one that well
> supports WebRTC.
> Dial-in (audio alternative or audio only): +1.512.647.1431
> PIN: 524 338 639#
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> OTOH, directly quoting Rick Moen <rick at linuxmafia.com> from this
> June's posting http://linuxmafia.com/pipermail/sf-lug/2024q2/016014.html
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> That's a bit ludicrous.  It's 2024.  You'd have to search really _hard_
> to find a sufficiently ancient graphical Web browser that doesn't work
> with Jitsi Meet.  Probably MSIE.
>
> Just say "Web browser", for heaven's sake.  Alternatively, there are
> bespoke Jitsi Meet clients for desktop and smartphone OSes.
>
> And yes, Jitsi Project does have a painfully exact "supported browsers"
> list.
> https://jitsi.github.io/handbook/docs/user-guide/supported-browsers/
> Even there, context matters:  These are versions _guaranteed_ to have
> not a trace of problems, i.e., specifically tested and vetted.  That
> doesn't mean, say, Firefox 67, a 2019 piece of software, wouldn't work.
> It would.  Practically anything from the last 20 years would.