Re: Is it time to shut down this effort?

2016-07-26 Thread Keith N. McKenna
Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> On 23/07/2016 Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>> My answer to the question posed in the tittle of this e-mail
>> unfortunately is yes. We have been moving by fits and starts for almost
>> 4 years and have very little to show for it. I would like to hear the
>> opinions of others though.
> 
> (I know this conversation moved to the dev list, but I'm answering here
> since it fits here)
> 
> There is some significant work done and we shouldn't throw it away.
> Everything is on the wiki, so we could just keep what we have and
> dispose of the process.
> 
[knmc]
It makes no sense to throw away the work that is already done and really
there has not been a process for quite some time.

> I mean: we can link to the (unfinished) new documentation from the wiki
> home page, design some template saying "This page is part of an
> unfinished documentation effort, please e-mail [this list] if you'd like
> to contribute" and put it on all pages that are still unfinished or just
> a title.
> 
> Then the risk is to lose a bit of oversight and consistency, but at
> least we show what we have and we give people the opportunity to help if
> the wish.
> 
[knmc]
The problem I see with that is that without a minimal amount of
consistency it looks very sloppy and does not present a good image for
the project as a whole and the ASF.

> By the way, thanks Keith for your documentation efforts so far. And if I
> were you, I would simply relax the process and be available for creating
> accounts for new volunteers and give advice when needed. This way we
> don't have to close or undo anything.
> 
[knmc]
I am not planning on going anywhere and will still monitor this list and
others to be a resource and to do account creation for the m-wiki and
white-listing for the c-wiki.

Regards
Keith
> Regards,
>   Andrea.




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


RE: Is it time to shut down this effort?

2016-07-24 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton
+1

> -Original Message-
> From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org]
> Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2016 14:58
> To: doc@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Is it time to shut down this effort?
> 
> On 23/07/2016 Keith N. McKenna wrote:
> > My answer to the question posed in the tittle of this e-mail
> > unfortunately is yes. We have been moving by fits and starts for
> almost
> > 4 years and have very little to show for it. I would like to hear the
> > opinions of others though.
> 
> (I know this conversation moved to the dev list, but I'm answering here
> since it fits here)
> 
> There is some significant work done and we shouldn't throw it away.
> Everything is on the wiki, so we could just keep what we have and
> dispose of the process.
> 
> I mean: we can link to the (unfinished) new documentation from the wiki
> home page, design some template saying "This page is part of an
> unfinished documentation effort, please e-mail [this list] if you'd like
> to contribute" and put it on all pages that are still unfinished or just
> a title.
> 
> Then the risk is to lose a bit of oversight and consistency, but at
> least we show what we have and we give people the opportunity to help if
> the wish.
> 
> By the way, thanks Keith for your documentation efforts so far. And if I
> were you, I would simply relax the process and be available for creating
> accounts for new volunteers and give advice when needed. This way we
> don't have to close or undo anything.
> 
> Regards,
>Andrea.
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: doc-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: doc-h...@openoffice.apache.org


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: doc-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: doc-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: Is it time to shut down this effort?

2016-07-24 Thread Andrea Pescetti

On 23/07/2016 Keith N. McKenna wrote:

My answer to the question posed in the tittle of this e-mail
unfortunately is yes. We have been moving by fits and starts for almost
4 years and have very little to show for it. I would like to hear the
opinions of others though.


(I know this conversation moved to the dev list, but I'm answering here 
since it fits here)


There is some significant work done and we shouldn't throw it away. 
Everything is on the wiki, so we could just keep what we have and 
dispose of the process.


I mean: we can link to the (unfinished) new documentation from the wiki 
home page, design some template saying "This page is part of an 
unfinished documentation effort, please e-mail [this list] if you'd like 
to contribute" and put it on all pages that are still unfinished or just 
a title.


Then the risk is to lose a bit of oversight and consistency, but at 
least we show what we have and we give people the opportunity to help if 
the wish.


By the way, thanks Keith for your documentation efforts so far. And if I 
were you, I would simply relax the process and be available for creating 
accounts for new volunteers and give advice when needed. This way we 
don't have to close or undo anything.


Regards,
  Andrea.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: doc-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: doc-h...@openoffice.apache.org



RE: Is it time to shut down this effort?

2016-07-24 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton
> -Original Message-
> From: Keith N. McKenna [mailto:keith.mcke...@comcast.net]
> Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2016 18:24
> To: d...@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Is it time to shut down this effort?
> 
> Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> > [BCC dev@ (really, this time)]
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Keith N. McKenna [mailto:keith.mcke...@comcast.net]
> >> Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2016 10:28
> >> To: doc@openoffice.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: Is it time to shut down this effort?
> >>
> >> Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> >>> [BCC dev@]
> >>>
> >>> Please be specific about what you mean by "this effort."
> >>>
> >>> The current documentation approach is to develop materials on the
> >> MediaWiki.  This wiki is typical in that it operates like an open-
> source
> >> project with commit then review (although there is a nice "Discuss"
> >> feature).
> >>>
> >>> If you mean the particular approach to reviewing and approving pages
> >> and having a kind of editor-in-chief, please say so.
> >>>
> >>>  - Dennis
> >>>
>  -Original Message-
>  From: Keith N. McKenna [mailto:keith.mcke...@comcast.net]
>  Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 20:36
>  To: doc@openoffice.apache.org
>  Subject: Is it time to shut down this effort?
> 
>  My answer to the question posed in the tittle of this e-mail
>  unfortunately is yes. We have been moving by fits and starts for
> >> almost
>  4 years and have very little to show for it. I would like to hear
> the
>  opinions of others though.
> 
>  Keith
> 
> >> Dennis;
> >>
> >> This mailing list came into existence to coordinate the development
> of
> >> documentation for Version 4 under the Apache License. There never was
> >> and was never intended to be an editor-in-chief. For a lot of reasons
> >> this particular effort has produced a very limited amount of usable
> >> documentation.
> >>
> >> My personal feeling is that it should be recognized that it is not
> doing
> >> what it was intended to and either retired or reconstituted in a
> >> different form.
> >>
> >> I think that my personal position is pretty obvious from my original
> >> message and I wanted to solicit comment from other participants.
> > [orcmid]
> >
> > I am still unclear on what it means to "shut down this effort."
> >
> > Close the doc@ list?
> >
> > What action do you have in mind that would result in a shut down?
> >
> > Also, perhaps a broader request for assistance in documentation is
> called for.  This might go with the adjustments just made to the
> download page.  And there are lists (and the Community Forum) where
> power users might be encouraged to contribute to documentation on the
> wiki.
> >
> > The nice thing about the documentation is that there is always room
> for additions and improvements. Whatever there is at the moment is what
> there is.  Positive effort is not wasted.
> >
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Keith
> Dennis;
> I specifically did not bring this to the dev list because I wanted to
> illicit responses from the members of the documentation list as to their
> thoughts before I came to the dev list with a concrete proposal. Since
> you insist on bringing it here I will bow to your insistence and express
> my thoughts her.
[orcmid] 

Keith, I think there is a misunderstanding about the purpose of the dev@ list.  
It is the place to work something out in the community that involves all of the 
stakeholders.

The reason for my BCC (and not CC: cross-posting) was so the conversation could 
remain on doc@ but dev@ could participate, appreciating that there are 
participants on doc@ that are not on dev@. 
 
So I failed at that, since the conversation has moved completely to dev@.  It's 
a weekend, so we perhaps should not make too much about the fact of complete 
silence on doc@ so far [;<). As you've seen already, there is discussion energy 
on dev@.  That there is a diversity of opinion and there are differences is not 
a bad thing.  And remember, "don't feed the trolls."

It may well be that the doc@ list is not needed.  Perhaps the way for writers 
to communicate is in the wiki structure itself.  We have the community wiki and 
we have the MediaWiki as avenues for that although I am uncertain how 
comfortable technical writers are with a wiki as a tumultuous open-source 
writing experience with distributed participants. 

 - Dennis


> 
> It is very simple. The documentation list serves no purpose and should
> be closed down. We have tried numerous times to generate more interest
> in gaining volunteers to help with documentation to no avail. Your board
> reports have succinctly stated that the "documentation effort" is
> stalled. Trying to get more people is doomed to failure unless we can
> attract experienced tech writers that are willing to take the time to
> mentor new volunteers and to overhaul the wiki editing policy and the
> style guide to reflect current conditions and practices in the
> discipline. This has 

RE: Is it time to shut down this effort?

2016-07-23 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton
[BCC dev@ (really, this time)]

> -Original Message-
> From: Keith N. McKenna [mailto:keith.mcke...@comcast.net]
> Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2016 10:28
> To: doc@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Is it time to shut down this effort?
> 
> Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> > [BCC dev@]
> >
> > Please be specific about what you mean by "this effort."
> >
> > The current documentation approach is to develop materials on the
> MediaWiki.  This wiki is typical in that it operates like an open-source
> project with commit then review (although there is a nice "Discuss"
> feature).
> >
> > If you mean the particular approach to reviewing and approving pages
> and having a kind of editor-in-chief, please say so.
> >
> >  - Dennis
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Keith N. McKenna [mailto:keith.mcke...@comcast.net]
> >> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 20:36
> >> To: doc@openoffice.apache.org
> >> Subject: Is it time to shut down this effort?
> >>
> >> My answer to the question posed in the tittle of this e-mail
> >> unfortunately is yes. We have been moving by fits and starts for
> almost
> >> 4 years and have very little to show for it. I would like to hear the
> >> opinions of others though.
> >>
> >> Keith
> >>
> Dennis;
> 
> This mailing list came into existence to coordinate the development of
> documentation for Version 4 under the Apache License. There never was
> and was never intended to be an editor-in-chief. For a lot of reasons
> this particular effort has produced a very limited amount of usable
> documentation.
> 
> My personal feeling is that it should be recognized that it is not doing
> what it was intended to and either retired or reconstituted in a
> different form.
> 
> I think that my personal position is pretty obvious from my original
> message and I wanted to solicit comment from other participants.
[orcmid] 

I am still unclear on what it means to "shut down this effort."  

Close the doc@ list?

What action do you have in mind that would result in a shut down?

Also, perhaps a broader request for assistance in documentation is called for.  
This might go with the adjustments just made to the download page.  And there 
are lists (and the Community Forum) where power users might be encouraged to 
contribute to documentation on the wiki.

The nice thing about the documentation is that there is always room for 
additions and improvements. Whatever there is at the moment is what there is.  
Positive effort is not wasted.

> 
> Regards
> Keith



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: doc-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: doc-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: Is it time to shut down this effort?

2016-07-23 Thread Keith N. McKenna
Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> [BCC dev@]
> 
> Please be specific about what you mean by "this effort."
> 
> The current documentation approach is to develop materials on the MediaWiki.  
> This wiki is typical in that it operates like an open-source project with 
> commit then review (although there is a nice "Discuss" feature).
> 
> If you mean the particular approach to reviewing and approving pages and 
> having a kind of editor-in-chief, please say so.
> 
>  - Dennis
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Keith N. McKenna [mailto:keith.mcke...@comcast.net]
>> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 20:36
>> To: doc@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: Is it time to shut down this effort?
>>
>> My answer to the question posed in the tittle of this e-mail
>> unfortunately is yes. We have been moving by fits and starts for almost
>> 4 years and have very little to show for it. I would like to hear the
>> opinions of others though.
>>
>> Keith
>>
Dennis;

This mailing list came into existence to coordinate the development of
documentation for Version 4 under the Apache License. There never was
and was never intended to be an editor-in-chief. For a lot of reasons
this particular effort has produced a very limited amount of usable
documentation.

My personal feeling is that it should be recognized that it is not doing
what it was intended to and either retired or reconstituted in a
different form.

I think that my personal position is pretty obvious from my original
message and I wanted to solicit comment from other participants.

Regards
Keith



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature