FYI, I posted this note to Docs using a different email address
than I use here. -- Jean
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Improving the process at Docs (was: dropdown and HOW TO)
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 12:22:37 +1000
From: Jean Hollis Weber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
OK, some suggestions from me about improving the process at Docs.
First, we need a clear indication on the first page of the Docs
site about how people can get involved if they want to. We don't
want that notice to interfere with people finding the info they
want if they have come there to get info, not to become involved.
So a link to a contributions page might do it.
Next, we need a clearly written, user-friendly page written for
new contributors, probably with links to other pages explaining
the details of certain processes. I know that a contributions
page is on the task list; I don't know if a draft is available,
and I admit that I have not had time to contribute to the
development of such a page. But I think a good place for someone
to start would be looking at what's on the OOoAuthors site
(http://oooauthors.org/en/) and seeing how the "How you can help"
section in particular could be adopted for the situation at Docs.
Next, one of my concerns is that although everyone can see from
the task list at Docs what is "in the works", I suspect that most
people just don't think to look at it. I certainly don't. So how
do we help steer people to things that need doing?
One way might be to list top priority items on the contributions
page, along with some indication of what stage they are at (need
writing, need reviewing for technical accuracy, need editing,
whatever) so people could see immediately what needs to be done.
The OOoAuthors site puts up a review list automatically when
items are submitted for review; the software at Docs doesn't
appear to have the "submission" feature, so manual intervention
might be necessary. Yes, I know, more work for someone... I don't
know what is the most practical way to handle this, I just think
it's worth seriously considering.
It might also be useful to borrow some other habits from
OOoAuthors that draw people's attention to things that need
doing. On the Authors mailing list, I do a lot of nudging --
suggesting to people that they might like to do such-and-such an
item from our to-do list. Sometimes it's a general nudge ("who'll
do this?"); other times I make a suggestion to a specific person
(often offlist).
As you know, we chatter a lot on the Authors list. For example,
when someone sumbits a chapter for review, they mention it on the
list. If not enough feedback occurs in a reasonable time, they
mention it again. This helps keep people aware of current work
without them needing to look it up themselves. It seems to be
very effective, because the work gets done!
Lastly, there needs to be a clear process for determining when a
document has "passed review" and is ready to publish, and someone
(or several people) authorised and available to publish material.
At Docs, "publication" means being posted on the Docs site, and
only a few people have CVS access to do that. The problems I
experienced years ago were (as far as I can tell) in this area...
who decides what's ready to publish, and who has time to actually
post it?
Jean
