Hi all, Thanks for your feedback.
This survey has been implemented thanks to the roadmap meeting we had early january. The "themes" and the features are the ones discussed during the meeting. If you think an important feature/theme is missing, please tell me. About the reported bugs, they are all fixed (language, scroll bars etc.). That was due to a bad html import in xwiki.org whereas it worked well everywhere else. Concerning this survey, it is built with Formassembly - a poll software - which has some constraints. It offers few options that is why all the questions are built with radio buttons. Anyway, this survey is built on the same pattern as the previous one : http://www.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/SurveyXWikiFeatures2009 that will be easier to compare results. You can check the survey by clicking on the following link : http://www.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/SurveyXWikiFeatures2012 Thanks for helping Benjamin 2012/1/24 Sergiu Dumitriu <[email protected]> > On 01/24/2012 02:53 AM, Marius Dumitru Florea wrote: > >> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 8:03 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu<[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> On 01/23/2012 12:19 PM, Vincent Massol wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Hi devs, >>>> >>>> In 2009 we launched a survey on xwiki.org: >>>> http://www.xwiki.org/xwiki/**bin/view/Main/**SurveyXWikiFeatures2009<http://www.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/SurveyXWikiFeatures2009> >>>> >>>> The results were published here: >>>> - >>>> http://www.xwiki.org/xwiki/**bin/view/Blog/Features+Survey+**Results<http://www.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Blog/Features+Survey+Results> >>>> - >>>> http://www.xwiki.org/xwiki/**bin/view/Blog/**FeatureStatus20120119<http://www.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Blog/FeatureStatus20120119> >>>> >>>> The idea is to do that same with a new survey. Benjamin Lanciaux (from >>>> XWiki SAS) has prepared one here: >>>> http://www.xwiki.org/xwiki/**bin/view/Main/**SurveyXWikiFeatures2012<http://www.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/SurveyXWikiFeatures2012> >>>> >>>> Please let me know if you're ok and I'll send the survey on the user >>>> list. >>>> >>> >>> >>> On top of Florin's remarks, I'd like to add that, in my opinion, the >>> themes >>> are not that well composed. >>> >>> Applications and App Store mixes several different things. On one hand it >>> includes something as generic as "More apps bundled", then it goes to >>> something as specific as "Glossary". Plus, it includes the "XWiki >>> Network" >>> which isn't something that the open source community handles. Why are >>> there >>> only two specific apps mentioned? Was it somehow determined that these >>> are >>> the most important apps requested by the community? >>> >>> Dev Tools: I'm not sure we should have this section at all. What is the >>> target of this survey? People that can understand and have an opinion on >>> this section aren't casual users. We're mixing user-facing features and >>> platform internals. Most of the items proposed here, like the new data >>> model >>> or interface extensions, can only be evaluated by experienced committers. >>> Others, such as "Syntax coloring" and "Livetable improvements", might fit >>> better in the "User dev tools" section. There is a risk that these very >>> technical items be considered important only by a handful of committers, >>> thus getting a very low score, although they are a precondition for >>> implementing other features proposed in the survey. Typo: >>> "Translate->Translatable document objects". >>> >>> Quality: This is another section that seems to mix a broad range of >>> topics, >>> from UI/UX improvements to internal aspects like LDAP, and build stuff >>> like >>> automated integration tests. Maybe instead of "Run Automated UI >>> Tests..." we >>> should say something that most users can relate to, such as "Better >>> quality >>> assurance for the supported browsers and databases". Why is multipage >>> export >>> related to quality? And will users understand the difference between this >>> multipage export and the one in the "Wiki Management" section? Typo: >>> "Sync >>> big (more then->than 2000 users) LDAP/AD groups". >>> >>> Ease of Use: I don't see the difference between some of the items here >>> and >>> items from the previous category. >>> >>> Help: I'd rename this section "Documentation". For "Shortcut help" I'd >>> link >>> to the design page where it's pretty neatly detailed. >>> >>> >> Universal Access: This should be renamed to Mobile Access, since it only >>> lists mobile-related items. "Universal" access implies more than a phone, >>> and should include stuff like better support for R2L languages, better >>> support for screen readers, a voice stylesheet, better stylesheet for >>> print, >>> stylesheets for small screens and for TVs. If you want to keep the >>> "Universal Access" title, then some of the items I mentioned should be >>> included in the survey as well. >>> >> >> I don't think it's bad to have a generic category name as "Universal >> access" even if we list only mobile related items. For me this is an >> open door for users to suggest features in that domain. Listing other >> items is not bad either but may send the wrong message that there is >> already someone (e.g. XWiki SAS) interested in implementing that >> feature, which might not be true. >> > > I would like to work on that, although I don't think it's a priority. > > Thanks, >> Marius >> >> >>> Wiki Management: What's the difference between "Multipage Export" from >>> the >>> Quality section, "Multipage Export UI" and "Better Wiki Import/Export"? >>> >>> What kind of user are you: What does "developer" mean? Is it a committer >>> developing the XWiki platform itself, or idoes it refer to external users >>> that develop applications on top of XWiki for their own wikis / for their >>> employers? >>> >>> We should include a final big textarea where users can write any comments >>> they'd like to share with us. >>> >>> >>> In general: >>> - too many abbreviations >>> - I'd link most of the items to their associated Jira issue or design >>> page, >>> if they have one >>> - some items are too cryptic or broad, like "Messaging UI" or "Improve >>> print >>> option", while others are too long, like "New data model for accessing >>> and >>> manipulating XWiki entities (needed for nested spaces for ex, global >>> versioning, rights on XObjects, translations on XObjects, etc)" >>> >> > > -- > Sergiu Dumitriu > http://purl.org/net/sergiu/ > ______________________________**_________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/**mailman/listinfo/devs<http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs> > -- Benjamin Lanciaux Marketing XWiki Skype : benjaminxwiki _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
