incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net>
Subject Re: [WWW][Policy] Participate! - Rewriting contributing.openoffice.org
Date Sat, 19 Nov 2011 03:10:59 GMT

On Nov 18, 2011, at 12:48 PM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 2:40 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2wave@comcast.net> wrote:
>> 
>> On Nov 18, 2011, at 9:48 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>> 
>>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:36 PM, Kay Schenk <kay.schenk@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2wave@comcast.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> There are several parts to the migration of openoffice.org website.
One
>>>>> area that needs attention is rewriting contributing.openoffice.org to
fit
>>>>> ASF and AOO policies. (Policies may need to be written and discussed.)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On the current main www.openoffice.org page, contributing is accessed
>>>>> from the fifth button - "I want to participate in OpenOffice.org"
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Volunteers are needed to take leadership of and contribute to this
>>>>> rewrite. Any committer can do this work.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I suggest that a directory be created within the podling site called
>>>>> "contributing". Within that directory there should be an index.mdtext
and
>>>>> as many subpages as required. Once completed, I can do an svn copy or
move
>>>>> to the ooo-site tree.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Before actually doing the work, let me propose a radical
>>>>> simplification.  AOO is organizationally flat, so we don't have all
>>>>> the destination sub-projects of the legacy OOo website.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 1) The "I want to participate" link on the main page goes to a single
>>>>> new page.  No need to be at contribute.openoffice.org.  In fact, I
>>>>> think I'd avoid that since to participate != to contribute.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Rob--
>>>> 
>>>> I'm not following you here. It's true that of course we are not going to
>>>> follow the former "project" hierarchy (lucky for use the "Projects" tab is
>>>> now gone on the setup site) that existed within OpenOffice.org, but I'm not
>>>> understanding what you’re trying to say about the existing "participate
"
>>>> link on the home page that transfers to  contributing.html.
>>>> 
>>>> In the legacy OOo sense, the "participate" link jumped to a "contribute"
>>>> page, contribute.html,  which listed a few ways to contribute/participate,
>>>> so in this sense, I think it meant the same thing (?).
>>>> 
>>>> I think you are making a distinction between participating and contributing
>>>> (?) based on ???? actual participation -- coding, etc -- vs monetary
>>>> contributions?
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> In English, participate means to take part in.  Contribute means to
>>> give something (including money, time, resources, etc.) for a
>>> charitable purpose.  So anyone who participates in the project is also
>>> contributing to the project via their time..  But not everyone who
>>> contributes is also participating.  For example, if you just donate
>>> via Paypal, then you are contributing, but not participating.
>> 
>> The site says "Participate" this what the pages describe and what the rewrite should
be.
>> 
>> The subdomain and OOo / Collabnet / Kenai project is contributing. contributing.openoffice.org
can have a permanent redirection wherever we decide. We can reduce all links to the old site
to the index of the new Participate Page(s).
>> 
>> The c.oo.o site currently has the following categories.
>> 
>> Programming
>> Marketing
>> Quality Assurance
>> Graphics and Art
>> Writing
>> Helping Users
>> User Experience
>> Monetary Donations
>> Language Communities
>> 
>> I think most of the categories should be kept.
>> 
>> There is also a guideline. This should be replaced with an introduction to the Apache
Way. There should be concrete examples of how users can find a ways to participate in the
project within each category.
>> 
>> Programming
>>        ooo-dev, svn, builds, ...
>> Marketing
>>        ooo-marketing, ...
>> Quality Assurance
>>        Bugzilla, ...
>> Graphics and Art
>>        Logos, icons, fonts, skins, ...
>> Writing
>>        Apache CMS, ODFAuthors, api docs, ...
>> Helping Users
>>        ooo-users, Forums
>> User Experience
>>        ?
>> Monetary Donations
>>        ASF donations and sponsorship links.
>> Language Communities
>>        Language Packs, N-L communities, what to do to add support for a language
to AOO.
>>        NL Mailing lists, NL Forums.
>> Apache Software Foundation
>>        The Apache Way, Project Governance, ...
>> 
>> 
>> The more I think about this the more I think these are podling pages.
>> 
> 
> What I see is this:
> 
> 1) What we have at openoffice.org today for this page is pretty much
> 100% wrong.  It is useless or worse for anyone interested in learning
> how to participate in AOO.
> 
> 2) Any prolonged development and planning effort around creating a new
> sub-site is equally ineffective, at least in the near term, since no
> users go to ooo-site.

I agree that we can be quick. We will ask Apache Infra to permanently redirect contributing.openoffice.org
to our new page either to

http://ooo-site.apache.org/participate/ 

or 

http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/participate/ 

As long as there is a simple page in place the infra change can proceed independently from
the content correction.


> 
> 3) From what I've been told, the plan is to switch the ooo-site live
> within a couple of weeks,

Well, next few weeks. I'm contemplating a more direct approach and pruning approach that must
proceed specially for several subdomains.

downloads.oo.o is another discussion and it goes as far away from the podling site as possible.

> 
> So.... it seems to me that anything that can be done now, in the short
> term, is more useful.  We can always refine it over time, add to it.,
> expand it, make it more friendly, etc.  But almost anything is better
> than the 100% incorrect information that is on the website now.  So
> I'd recommend, per my original proposal, that we just put a 1-pager up
> for now, directing volunteers to ooo-dev.  Unless, of course, someone
> actually is volunteering to do more in this same timeframe.  Doing
> more later is fine as well.  But let's keep the focus on what can be
> done in, say the next two weeks.

Agreed. Keep it simple and then refine it. I think it will turn some attention to the AOO
podling's story.

Regards,
Dave


> 
> -Rob


Mime
View raw message