Create an "owner"/"expert" list for the website tree

[ned-deily]

It's very difficult to know who, if anyone, maintains the content of the various parts of the python.org website. Part of that is because the content is managed through various mechanisms (some semi-auto-generated, some via Pages in the Django admin interface, etc). There are still a large number of legacy pages that were imperfectly migrated from the old website, some out-of-date, others still relevant. And, while it is possible to look at a change history for some types of content objects (e.g. for Page objects), that history doesn't show changed content and many other other objects have no readily accessible history. AFAICT, it's almost impossible to know who is doing what where or who should be doing what where. I think a big step towards getting a better picture of where there are coverage problems and who to turn to when there are issues in particular areas would be to create an "owners" or "experts" list, roughly analogous to the "experts" page for CPython itself in the Python Developers Guide. There are a various ways this could be done. One suggestion: create a Wiki page or perhaps a Page object in the website with a simple tree of the website URLs and corresponding owner/experts, starting roughly one line for each entry at perhaps the highest levels of the website, perhaps something like:

/about -
/downloads -
/docs -
/community
/jobs
/psf-landing
...
with additional levels of URLs as needed under each category.

It would probably be good to use tags to functional groups (formal or informal) within the community as the groups, their roles with regard to the website, and their membership will be fluid. For example,

/downloads -> CPython Release Management
/docs -> CPython Release Management
/psf-landing -> PSF Staff
...

CPython Release Management
... release manager 1
... release manager 2

PSF Staff
...

For this all to be useful, it needs to be lightweight, easy to maintain, and flexible, hence the wiki page suggestion. It doesn't have to be complete or complex. If someone could take a stab at creating the outline and publicize it among the people with admin and other content-creating permissions, we could all start filling it in. I have suggested this in the past to various people and there has seemed to be general agreement that that would be a good idea. We just need need to actually do it, at least get the skeleton out there somewhere for people to start filling in. Perhaps now with @MarkMangoba onboard, he could get this started. That would be really helpful, IMHO!

[MarkMangoba]

Thanks @ned-deily , these are all very good suggestions. @ejodlowska and I are going to start up the pythondotorg workgroup and I think this is something the workgroup can take a look at (I believe you are already part of the ML).

Nice to meet you virtually and looking forward to working with you.

[scottilee]

@MarkMangoba @ejodlowska any updates on this?