Mailing-List: contact dev-help@harmony.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: local policy)
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [doc][website] finalizing changes to nav pane
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 14:28:10 +0400
Message-ID: 
 <523F3D8D8C97554AA47E53DF1A05466AF29E56@nnsmsx411.ccr.corp.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <c30d70960706220159v61aa6c57x56417881d25fed7e@mail.gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [doc][website] finalizing changes to nav pane
Thread-Index: Ace0q70ZsVnTP6YOTGOXF/QyXE4bgwCZ27Aw
From: "Morozova, Nadezhda" <nadezhda.morozova@intel.com>
To: <dev@harmony.apache.org>

Alexei,
Thanks for bringing attention to this page. I remember that we renamed
the link to "Who we are" explicitly to show that it's not only the
committers' list. We also planned to add other
roles-and-responsibilities info there from the Guidelines page
http://harmony.apache.org/guidelines.html "People, Places, and Things"
section. However, the change was not made.

Currently, we've a new name for the old page, and it doesn't seem right.
If nobody objects, I'll move the definitions of committers, contributors
and PMC to the Who We Are page.=20

Cheers,=20
Nadya
=20

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Alexei Fedotov [mailto:alexei.fedotov@gmail.com]
>Sent: Friday, June 22, 2007 1:00 PM
>To: dev@harmony.apache.org
>Subject: Re: [doc][website] finalizing changes to nav pane
>
>Nadya,
>
>What do you think about renaming "Community"->"Who we are" reference
>on the first page with "Committers"? I think this would be more direct
>and less confusing. People might expect to see a list of community
>members when they click to "Community"->"Who we are".
>
>Thanks.
>
>On 1/18/07, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
>--
>With best regards,
>Alexei,
>ESSD, Intel