harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <g...@pobox.com>
Subject Re: [doc][website] finalizing changes to nav pane
Date Sun, 21 Jan 2007 22:36:37 GMT

On Jan 21, 2007, at 4:57 PM, Morozova, Nadezhda wrote:

> Is there anything wrong with what I did?
> I can revert the change if there are opponents. I really don't mean to
> be too pushy or anything. It's just that we seem to have discussed the
> nav pane changes, and the model was posted on the sandbox. I apologize
> if this was not too elegant :)
>

Just wondering.  I thought we were having a discussion about that  
stuff...

geir


> Cheers,
> Nadya
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:geir@pobox.com]
>> Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 12:25 AM
>> To: dev@harmony.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [doc][website] finalizing changes to nav pane
>>
>> Where did governance go?
>>
>> On Jan 18, 2007, at 12:28 PM, Morozova, Nadezhda wrote:
>>
>>> Changed nav pane has been committed.
>>> Can continue with cosmetic changes, but at least we have the changes
>>> visible now. Phjuh.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Nadya
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:geir@pobox.com]
>>>> Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 4:34 PM
>>>> To: dev@harmony.apache.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [doc][website] finalizing changes to nav pane
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 18, 2007, at 10:21 AM, Morozova, Nadezhda wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Geir,
>>>>> Thanks for a prompt reply. I'm glad you're on the OK side :)
>>>>
>>>> By that I mean that the current menu as currently on the site is
>>>> ok...
>>>>
>>>>> Specifics per your concerns:
>>>>> - ASF and Other Projects links - suggest that we add these to the
>>>>> General list
>>>>
>>>> ASF already was in the general list.  Other Projects seems
>>>> appropriate for a community section.
>>>>
>>>>> - wiki - we have mobile data there and I don't see what's wrong
> with
>>>>> having it in the Documentation.
>>>>
>>>> I don't understand what you mean here.
>>>>
>>>>> - policy and guidelines: guidelines seems a gathering of
> multi-topic
>>>>> info, suggest that we restructure it, several ideas below.
>>>>
>>>> I agree we should restructure it.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> <we're drifting toward issue (2 - some generic pages need
>>>>> improvement) >
>>>>>
>>>>> Current project guidelines content and suggestions:
>>>>> * People, Places, and Things: defines roles of committer,
>>> contributor,
>>>>> PMC (btw, is outdated) - can go into Who We Are (former  
>>>>> committers'
>>>>> page)
>>>>
>>>> Why?
>>>>
>>>>> * Status: tells wrong N/A info about status files - should be
>>>>> removed
>>>>
>>>> Yes
>>>>
>>>>> * Voting: describes +1/-1 votes etc - can go into Policy or into
>>>>> Resolution guidelines
>>>>
>>>> No - contribution policy is something very special and specific to
>>>> this project, something no other ASF project has.  I think that
>>>> mixing it with canonical ASF project governance concepts is wrong.
>>>>
>>>>> * Types of action items: defines types of issues by severity and
>>>>> specifics -  can fit naturally into Issue Resolution Guidelines
>>>>> since it
>>>>> describes issues that are further resolved :)
>>>>
>>>> Don't agree.   There are "big picture" issue governance, and detail
>>>> governance.
>>>>
>>>>> * When to commit a change: gives generics on comits; is info for
>>>>> committers only - can go into committers or Get Involved page or
>>> issue
>>>>> resolution since it explain issue resolution by patch commit
>>>>
>>>> could be
>>>>
>>>>> * Patch format: tips on how to create patches - fits into Get
>>>>> Involved,
>>>>> subheading How to Create and Submit A Patch or Enhancement.
>>>>
>>>> Yep
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Nadya
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:geir@pobox.com]
>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 1:55 PM
>>>>>> To: dev@harmony.apache.org
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [doc][website] finalizing changes to nav pane
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jan 18, 2007, at 7:15 AM, Morozova, Nadezhda wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>>> After a long-long pause, I'm restarting the thread about our
>>> website
>>>>>>> navigation menu and generic pages that require improvement. I
> hope
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> after the New Year all the emotions have boiled down and we can
>>> move
>>>>>>> over this quickly :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Key ideas that were gathered during the review of the sandbox
>>>>>>> copy of
>>>>>>> website:
>>>>>>> (1) navigation menu is mostly ok though several improvements
are
>>>>>>> possible
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm in the "it's ok" camp. There are tweaks, but I still don't  
>>>>>> see
>>>>>> where major change is needed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (2) some generic pages require improvement because they're
>>>>>>> outdated
>>>>> or
>>>>>>> do not contain required info or don't deliver their main idea
>>>>>>> clearly
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (3) starting page does not give a clear idea of where our  
>>>>>>> project
>>> is
>>>>> -
>>>>>>> for a newcomer
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let's address these one by one. This letter is about (1) only.
> For
>>>>> (2)
>>>>>>> and (3), I'll send patches per page so that we don't miss
> anything
>>>>>>> during the review.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For the nav pane, I've a patch ready and waiting for your
>>>>>>> approval to
>>>>>>> commit. If you are strongly against a change suggested, let's
>>>>>>> discuss
>>>>>>> this. New version:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> General
>>>>>>>     * Home
>>>>>>>     * License
>>>>>>>     * Contribution Policy
>>>>>>>     * Downloads
>>>>>>>     * FAQ
>>>>>>> (removed references to ASF and project guidelines because the
>>>>>>> Guidelines
>>>>>>> actually have info on a number of very different topics, we can
>>>>>>> try
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> find a better place for them; having Policy *and* Guidelines
>>>>>>> confuses
>>>>>>> many people)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We're an ASF project - please put the ASF link back.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> who has been confused by having "Contribution Policy" and  
>>>>>> "Project
>>>>>> Guidelines"?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Community
>>>>>>>     * Get Involved
>>>>>>>     * Who we are
>>>>>>>     * Mailing Lists
>>>>>>>     * Bug Tracker
>>>>>>> (removed Documentation (useless page), FAQ is above now, Wiki
>>>>>>> is in
>>>>>>> docs
>>>>>>> now, renamed Committers > Who we are (might not be the best
 
>>>>>>> name,
>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>> the page can be about PMC, committers and contributors, why only
>>> the
>>>>>>> committers?); moved JIRA to this list and renamed > Bug Tracker
> as
>>>>> the
>>>>>>> more generic term)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Development
>>>>>>>     * Source Code
>>>>>>>     * Getting Started (link for contributors)
>>>>>>>     * Project Roadmap
>>>>>>>     * Resolution Guideline
>>>>>>> (removed How are we Doing (useless page), moved roadmap lower
to
>>>>>>> make
>>>>>>> Source code stand out, removed Other projects (rarely used  
>>>>>>> page),
>>>>>>> added
>>>>>>> Resolution guideline)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We should keep the "Other Projects" and keep it up to date.  Why
>>>>>> are
>>>>>> Resolution Guidlines not in docs?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Documentation
>>>>>>>     * Sitemap
>>>>>>>     * Wiki
>>>>>>>     * HDK
>>>>>>>     * DRLVM
>>>>>>>     * Class Libraries
>>>>>>>     * Build-test Framework
>>>>>>> (renamed Subcomponents > Documentation; added sitemap (the
file
>>>>> itself
>>>>>>> is under development now), added wiki link here, added HDK page
>>>>>>> (discussible, but hope to have a nice patch to describe our
>>>>>>> deliverable
>>>>>>> there); removed classlib status (outdated, we can have Wiki
>>> instead)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Uh, I'm not a big fan of having important info on the Wiki.  can
> we
>>>>>> put that back?  I think it's important to have that kind of
>>>>>> stuff in
>>>>>> one place, here on the site.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> geir
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> nadya


Mime
View raw message