On Jan 18, 2007, at 10:21 AM, Morozova, Nadezhda wrote:
Geir,
Thanks for a prompt reply. I'm glad you're on the OK side :)
By that I mean that the current menu as currently on the site is ok...
Specifics per your concerns:
- ASF and Other Projects links - suggest that we add these to the
General list
ASF already was in the general list. Other Projects seems
appropriate for a community section.
- wiki - we have mobile data there and I don't see what's wrong with
having it in the Documentation.
I don't understand what you mean here.
- policy and guidelines: guidelines seems a gathering of multi-topic
info, suggest that we restructure it, several ideas below.
I agree we should restructure it.
<we're drifting toward issue (2 - some generic pages need
improvement) >
Current project guidelines content and suggestions:
* People, Places, and Things: defines roles of committer, contributor,
PMC (btw, is outdated) - can go into Who We Are (former committers'
page)
Why?
* Status: tells wrong N/A info about status files - should be removed
Yes
* Voting: describes +1/-1 votes etc - can go into Policy or into
Resolution guidelines
No - contribution policy is something very special and specific to
this project, something no other ASF project has. I think that
mixing it with canonical ASF project governance concepts is wrong.
* Types of action items: defines types of issues by severity and
specifics - can fit naturally into Issue Resolution Guidelines
since it
describes issues that are further resolved :)
Don't agree. There are "big picture" issue governance, and detail
governance.
* When to commit a change: gives generics on comits; is info for
committers only - can go into committers or Get Involved page or issue
resolution since it explain issue resolution by patch commit
could be
* Patch format: tips on how to create patches - fits into Get
Involved,
subheading How to Create and Submit A Patch or Enhancement.
Yep
Cheers,
Nadya
-----Original Message-----
From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 1:55 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [doc][website] finalizing changes to nav pane
On Jan 18, 2007, at 7:15 AM, Morozova, Nadezhda wrote:
Hi everyone,
After a long-long pause, I'm restarting the thread about our website
navigation menu and generic pages that require improvement. I hope
that
after the New Year all the emotions have boiled down and we can move
over this quickly :)
Key ideas that were gathered during the review of the sandbox
copy of
website:
(1) navigation menu is mostly ok though several improvements are
possible
I'm in the "it's ok" camp. There are tweaks, but I still don't see
where major change is needed.
(2) some generic pages require improvement because they're outdated
or
do not contain required info or don't deliver their main idea
clearly
+1
(3) starting page does not give a clear idea of where our project is
-
for a newcomer
?
Let's address these one by one. This letter is about (1) only. For
(2)
and (3), I'll send patches per page so that we don't miss anything
during the review.
For the nav pane, I've a patch ready and waiting for your
approval to
commit. If you are strongly against a change suggested, let's
discuss
this. New version:
General
* Home
* License
* Contribution Policy
* Downloads
* FAQ
(removed references to ASF and project guidelines because the
Guidelines
actually have info on a number of very different topics, we can try
and
find a better place for them; having Policy *and* Guidelines
confuses
many people)
We're an ASF project - please put the ASF link back.
who has been confused by having "Contribution Policy" and "Project
Guidelines"?
Community
* Get Involved
* Who we are
* Mailing Lists
* Bug Tracker
(removed Documentation (useless page), FAQ is above now, Wiki is in
docs
now, renamed Committers > Who we are (might not be the best name,
but
the page can be about PMC, committers and contributors, why only the
committers?); moved JIRA to this list and renamed > Bug Tracker as
the
more generic term)
Ok
Development
* Source Code
* Getting Started (link for contributors)
* Project Roadmap
* Resolution Guideline
(removed How are we Doing (useless page), moved roadmap lower to
make
Source code stand out, removed Other projects (rarely used page),
added
Resolution guideline)
We should keep the "Other Projects" and keep it up to date. Why are
Resolution Guidlines not in docs?
Documentation
* Sitemap
* Wiki
* HDK
* DRLVM
* Class Libraries
* Build-test Framework
(renamed Subcomponents > Documentation; added sitemap (the file
itself
is under development now), added wiki link here, added HDK page
(discussible, but hope to have a nice patch to describe our
deliverable
there); removed classlib status (outdated, we can have Wiki instead)
Uh, I'm not a big fan of having important info on the Wiki. can we
put that back? I think it's important to have that kind of stuff in
one place, here on the site.
geir
Thanks,
nadya
