forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Crossley <>
Subject Re: Site-author organization
Date Sat, 12 Aug 2006 00:01:51 GMT
Ferdinand Soethe wrote:
> David Crossley wrote:
> > In the previous thread, Ross and i had strong opinions
> > about not making a distinction between "us and them".
> > We are all "developers". Some of us (mainly the committers)
> > make extra effort to do the tasks that keep the project
> > flowing. I have not yet heard any justification for making
> > a distinction. In fact i think that it would be dangerous
> > for the project health.
> I had and have no objection to your intention of not making a
> distinction between 'us and them'.

Ah, that was not clear to me sorry. The naming and
organisation suggestions seemed to make me think
that we were not on the same wavelength.

>  And yet I still find the term
> developers misleading as many people would not consider themselves
> 'developers' if they contributed documentation. Just because we think
> of all of them as 'developers' will not change that.

Good one. This is a nice evolution to find one
of the key issues.

> 'Participation' seems like an excellent alternative, sorry I missed
> that post at the time.

Not sure yet. Need to put our wordsmith caps on.

> Apart from that:
> For users or developers looking for info to solve a problem I would
> take a different approach:
> Rather than creating a tab-name that will make people look for the
> mailings lists in the project tab, I would prefer to create additional
> references to these resources in the versioned docs.

That too. Perhaps an additional tab as well.
Going away today, will think some more after
the weekend.

> This way people can smoothly cross over from Forrest documentation to
> the extended documentation in the mailing list. A collection of
> pointers to important topics in the mailing list might help guide
> people this way or encourage writers to turn a topic into a piece of
> documentation.

Good ideas. I have often encouraged us to do that.
In the absence of full docs, just make a simple
link to some mail threads. Summarise content later.
A while ago i started a Jira category as another way
to grab mail threads.

> > The "Developers" tab includes a few documents under
> > the sub-section "Project". I reckon that these should
> > be moved up to the "Getting involved" section.
> Well yes. Although the project guidelines are slightly more than
> that (mission statement) and really talk about the project as a
> whole.
> In any case I'd suggest to place that at the top of the participation
> tab.
> In the longer term: I'd like to split this document into a
> mission statement that goes on the first tab and project by-laws that
> remain in the participation section. Wdyt?

Need to ponder that. Our inception resolution said
we need to maintain "guidelines", so i suppose no need
to be one doc.


> >> - Resources and Infrastructure lists the tools and infrastructure
> >>   available for people working for the project.
> > I think that it is way more that just that little group.
> > Developers want to participate in the mailing lists, and
> > want to search and add to the Issue Tracker, etc.
> OK, so why not add references to these resources to the tab that
> caters specifically to these people (Versioned Docs). Perhaps
> rename the tab 'Documentation' to make it more obvious.
> >>   ...This could be a
> >>   subheading to "Getting involved" but since it is needed quite often
> >>   I left it at the top level to make it easier to find.
> > Perhaps we should merge these few resources into the
> > top-level section and rename it from "Getting involved"
> > to "Resources and Infrastructure" (or a better name).
> I'd really like to keep the clear distinction between the 'how can I
> participate' and the 'what tools can I use' parts of this tab.
> --
> Ferdinand Soethe

View raw message