incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamil...@acm.org>
Subject RE: [discuss][www][wiki] Native-lang sites was Web, WIki, and Participation
Date Tue, 06 Sep 2011 22:13:10 GMT
Sorry, I meant discussion at the wiki itself.  It is weird to discuss a wiki from a list, yes?
 Especially a community wiki.  Any preferences about that?  I want to splice in more information
and detail, but not trample on anything or just be off in a crevasse somewhere.

Also, what is your preference for introduction of discussion items in the wiki pages.  We
don't have a discussion tab, so something else is needed.  Thoughts?

 - Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.schenk@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2011 14:41
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org; dennis.hamilton@acm.org
Subject: Re: [discuss][www][wiki] Native-lang sites was Web, WIki, and Participation

Dennis--

Hi...I'm just getting to this now.


On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 8:08 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote:


	Thanks Dave, those are useful inventory items to ensure coverage and disposition of some
sort.
	
	What are your thoughts along the lines of my question to Kay concerning how updates and discussions
on these would be handled cleanly?
	
	In fact, what is the desired action with regard to the items on those pages? Anything specific?
	


The recommendations regarding the web sites were mine alone.  I guess my feeling was since
pretty much ALL development is being handled by one list here currently, it makes sense to
me to combine areas that I think are code development related and hence the recommendations
I made. This being said, I think at the very least, the current project heads involved in
the various "development" areas like api, appliation framework, database -- really anything
designated as "core" (thanks to Marcus for this) -- should be contacted to see what they think,
or rather how they might to combine what's on these sites. Right now, if you go to the current
OOo wiki, 

http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page

you'll see the development "teams" listed.

There may be some legacy info some of these folks want to keep from the web sites, but I couldn't
really speak to that.

Maybe the best way would be just to just start a thread with the subject heading

[DISCUSS] Simplifying the new Apache OOo web site  according to "category" function

or something like that, pointing folks to

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/OOo-to-ASF-site-recommendation

and see what anyone has to say.




	
	 - Dennis
	



	-----Original Message-----
	From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2wave@comcast.net]
	Sent: Monday, September 05, 2011 19:16
	To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
	
	Subject: Re: [discuss][www][wiki] Native-lang sites was Web, WIki, and Participation
	
	Dennis,
	
	Kay's page is not the only one that discusses the subdomains/projects of openoffice.org.
These are variations.
	https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/OOo-Sitemap
	https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/OpenOffice+Domains
	
	Here are the "synonym" domains to openoffice.org. There are some decisions to be made about
what should be kept.
	https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Current+Roster+of+OpenOffice+Domains
	
	Feel free to either edit or comment on any of these wiki pages, many have already.
	
	I think we are getting closer to be able to propose a coherent migration plan.
	
	Regards,
	Dave
	
	On Sep 5, 2011, at 3:45 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
	
	> Kay,
	>
	> I'd like to start taking some of the material that is beautifully captured on your OOo-to-ASF-site-recommendation
page down to the next level of detail.  I think linking to additional pages is the way to
do it, with those pages focused on details at the next level for a very specific topic, such
as the Bugzilla migration.
	>
	> 1. I was thinking the hot links would be added into the "Migration Recommendations"
cells.  Does that fit with your thinking?
	>
	> 2. Also, I don't know a good way to tie in discussion on the OOo-to-ASF... page.  There
is nothing like a Discuss tab.  Do you have a preference?
	>
	> 3. Finally, I see your primary restructuring separation.  I agree to that in principle.
 There are clearly cross-over points where the user side provides a gateway to the developer
side, as it were.  My question: I don't know how your categories map to that restructuring.
 Are they meant to, or not?
	>
	> Thanks for the attention to coverage and detail, it is a big help.
	>
	> - Dennis
	>
	>
	>
	> -----Original Message-----
	> From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.schenk@gmail.com]
	> Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2011 14:24
	> To: OOo Apache
	> Subject: [discuss][www][wiki] Native-lang sites was Web, WIki, and Participation
	>
	> Continuing our discussion from Thurs, if you now go to
	>
	> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Site-PPMC-Plan
	>
	> and navigate through this "portal", specifically the survey of existing
	> OOo services, I tried to reorganize some things, and include the web
	> pages in this overview.
	>
	> and, did address some of the "old" questions (topics) in
	>
	> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/OOo-to-ASF-site-recommendation
	>
	> So, maybe that will help.
	>
	> [ ... ]
	>
	
	




-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK

"Music expresses that which cannot be said and 
 on which it is impossible to be silent."
                                                   -- Victor Hugo





Mime
View raw message