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: [DISCUSS][WWW] Native-Language Sites (was: Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org)
Date Thu, 10 Nov 2011 19:13:03 GMT
Hi Rob,

On Nov 10, 2011, at 10:46 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2wave@comcast.net> wrote:
> <snip>
> 
>> I think that the following process should be considered.
>> 
> 
> A few questions, to make sure I understand.
> 
>> (1) Migrate each N-L site fully into the Apache SVN. They are all preserved.
>> 
> 
> In other words, copy the existing static HTML from the legacy OOo
> website into SVN.   I assume this is hooked up to the Apache CMS as
> well and we point a subdomain to it?

This is the step we are doing now. Yes the pages will "work" in the CMS, but I am going to
stop worrying about fixing these to work.

> 
>> (2) Tag each site in SVN to preserve the state and make it easy to find the "initial"
state. Keep a record of this tag on an N-L page.
>> 
> 
> If you check in the N-L site with a single commit, this would be the
> same as the revision number for the ooo-site/pl directory, for
> example.  Is that correct?  In that case we don't really need a tag.

The sites were not necessarily in a singular revision number, but sure we could say that certain
revision numbers could be used. I just think a tag is clearer and I believe that tags are
light in SVN.

> 
>> (3) Remove from SVN all, or most, of the N-L site. Nothing is really deleted the
whole site will always be recoverable from the tag created in (2).
>> 
> 
> I don't understand that step.  I understand what you are saying
> technically, but I don't understand the "why".  Don't we want to
> preserve the N-L site?

We do, but I don't know that we want to continue hosting huge archives of out of date material
without people in the N-L taking care of the content.

> 
> They might require some clean up, if there are things that are
> out-of-policy, like fund raising.  But we should be able to identify
> these via Google Translates, or even by creating a dump of all
> external links.

The task is huge and beyond our current ability to provide governance. There are sites like
the Dutch where the OOo language project has left a "Gone to LibreOffice sign"

>> (4) Update the www / English site - moving dev portions to the podling and writing
the correct guidelines and policies for the main front.
>> 
> 
> OK

I am specifically talking about "projects" like ooo-site.apache.org/contributing. I recommend
that rewritten pages be in markdown where possible.

> 
>> (5) As Volunteers appear from a N-L the first task is to translate pages and header
links in (4). Translated pages will be accessed using ACCEPT-LANG browser headers, the structure
should follow.
>> 
> 
> So the idea is we have a set of translated N-L homepages, based on the
> default English site as a template?  And these pages would load based
> on browser-based language detection.  What if I wanted to explicitly
> load the French or the German page, but my browser is set to English?
> Would there be some obvious way to do this?

This would be in a dropdown or sidebar accessible from the top.

>> (6) Each N-L may continue to have a unique main page that will be accessed either
at pl.openoffice.org/ redirected to www.openoffice.org/pl
>> 
> 
> I thought these pages were deleted from SVN per #3 above?

That is a question to decide. We may keep an edited index.html for the top level for the N-L
projects that require it.

Some N-Ls have twitter feeds and other front content.

> 
>> (7) Each N-L should have there own links page to go off-site to locally appropriate
sites.
>> 
> 
> Should?  Or may?  Why isn't openoffice.org appropriate?

May have their own. We cannot have non-Apache fundraising on either site. This is an area
that will certainly be unique.

> 
>> (8) If an N-L site is doing any fundraising outside of the ASF then that must move
off openoffice.org. Those pages should be linked to from the page described in (7) and they
must make clear that those funds are not associated with the ASF. This is is something that
the ASF requires.
>> 
> 
> Linking to an external site is fine, I think, even if it raises funds.
> Any external links should make it clear that they are non-Apache,
> etc.  But I would not be comfortable linking specifically to a
> fundraising page.
> 
> Example 1:   "Try this site for some amazing Polish templates for
> Apache OpenOffice" and then the linked to site has templates as well
> as button that says "Contribute here to support the development of
> further templates".
> 
> Example 2: "Click here to donate to support the translators of the
> Polish OpenOffice" and then link directly to PayPal or other page for
> collecting contributions.
> 
> I think example 1 is fine, but example 2 would not.  I don't think we
> want to be offering placement to links that are solely or primarily
> external fund raising links.  Otherwise, I could just put in some
> links to Amazon books related to OpenOffice and have those links be
> tied to my Amazon Associates account, so I get a cut from Amazon.  We
> can't have stuff like that.

This is what the (P)PMC will need to police. I agree that is not primarily fundraising, but
it is the example of a case where the link must be to an external site.

> 
>> (9) A N-L site might need pages that the main site or other N-L sites might not have,
in that case maybe everyone needs the page, or one like it. It can be worked out.
>> 
>> Obviously there would be a lot of sinew and muscles to add to this skeleton and I've
not focused on related spellcheck, dictionary, ML, ..., but does this approach make sense?
>> 
> 
> It is not clear to me whether the diversity in N-L pages was by design
> or simply from lack of coordination.  Just has, for example, all
> Apache pages have a similar navigational structure, as well as
> mandatory content, I think we should enforce the same for N-L pages.
> Remember, these pages represent the AOOo project, and therefore
> Apache, to visitors who may never see the main English project page.
> So we need to make sure that all of our bases are covered in on that
> page: license, how to download, ToU, mailing lists, support forums,
> etc.  And this needs to be done for any entry point the user makes.
> So I think we're better off with a cookie cutter approach for the
> webpages, with specific areas for extensibility according to N-L
> needs.

Yes, you get the raison d'etre!

Now to wait for feedback from the rest of the world.

Best Regards,
Dave


> 
> -Rob
> 
> 
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>> 
>>> 
>>> So the question I have on the Polish website is, how are we doing for
>>> users?  Do we know what the download stats are for the Polish version
>>> of OOo?  If it is significant, I'd assume there are many visitors to
>>> those web pages as well.  Unfortunately we don't have any page count
>>> statistics for our website.  So we really don't have a good sense of
>>> how much used these pages are.
>>> 
>>> In any case, what I am saying is this:  If it is useful and used, then
>>> we should keep it and make sure we have a communication to those users
>>> that let's them know that we always welcome their help in maintaining
>>> that website, and explain how they can get more involved.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -Rob
>>> 
>>>> Also note, this site has not yet been ported over to the staging site.
>>>> 
>>>> And finally, I am having a few problems getting my recent changes to the
>>>> N-L page to actually "publish" so no fun link from the staging home page
>>>> yet.
>>>>  <http://ooo-site.apache.org/>
>>>> --
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> MzK
>>>> 
>>>> "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged
>>>>  by the way its animals are treated."
>>>>                              -- Mohandas Gandhi
>>>> 
>> 
>> 


Mime
View raw message