incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [user guides] Use of AOO logo on cover of ODFAuthors user guide?
Date Thu, 26 Apr 2012 02:31:35 GMT
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 5:40 PM, Jean Weber <jeanweber@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 21:27, Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> Main thing is to avoid having the user be confused about the source of
>> the documentation.  It is from ODFAuthors, not AOO.  So when we host
>> the files on the wiki, we should make sure it is clear to the user
>> where to report errors,where they can go to volunteer, who they can
>> thank, etc.
>
>
> Regarding hosting the files on the wiki, I assume you mean on a page
> linked from this one (which needs a major overhaul, probably by me, if
> we're going to keep it):
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation  I have not
> been paying close attention to this list, so I am not up to date about
> what is planned for the wiki.
>
> I was under the impression that new ODFAuthors books might not be
> allowed on the wiki, but rather the wiki would have only a pointer to
> somewhere else that they might be stored. The last time I paid
> attention (some time ago), several suggestions (with precedents) had
> been made. Has that been decided one way or the other?
>


Do you have a preference?   If you host the guides externally, then
you can drive traffic to the ODFAuthors site and maybe get more
volunteers or even donations.

>From policy perspective, having the guides on the wiki is debatable.
I could see it either way.

In favor of it, I'd say:

1) It is a community wiki where content is welcome from anyone
2) We're currently hosting the OOo 3.3 guides there.

Opposing would be:

1) We should not be distributing large files via the website
(including the wiki).   This is a bandwidth issue.
2) We should not be distributing large files in general outside of a
release.   A community wiki as a wiki is fine.  But using it as a a
3rd party distribution mechanism is more problematic.  That's why we
have things like the extensions and templates repositories.

-Rob


> I certainly agree about making it clear who has produced the docs,
> where to report errors, etc.
>
> --Jean

Mime
View raw message