Am 03.07.11 01:30, schrieb Kay Schenk:
On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Raphael Bircher<[email protected]> wrote:
Am 02.07.11 23:41, schrieb Kay Schenk:
OUCH! see below...
On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Dave Fisher<[email protected]>
wrote:
Yesterday I got tired of the look of people.mdtext in the project site.
It
was so 1990s. So, I've improved the look via css and adding defined
widths.
I guess I am volunteering for the item on
https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/**Help+Wanted<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Help+Wanted>
Several of us have been surveying the existing openoffice.org website on
several wiki pages mostly linked to from:
https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/**Site-PPMC-Plan<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Site-PPMC-Plan>
With over 140 "projects" in openoffice.org, it will be important to
agree
to a mapping which reduces the granularity by more than an order of
magnitude. The page
http://projects.openoffice.**org/<http://projects.openoffice.org/>is a good and
clear
way to start - and pretty much fits the structure on
https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/**
Project+Planning<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Project+Planning>
• Product Development
• Extension Development
• Language Support
• Helping Users
• Distribution
• Promotion
I think that these groupings will help us easily have a rule about which
projects end up on http://openoffice.apache.org/ or stay on the
successor
http://*.openoffice.org/.
Projects have "webcontent" and/or "wiki" content. On openoffice.orgthere
is a generally consistent look. There are exceptions which are marketing
sites like http://why.openoffice.org/. The difference is glaring because
that is the first big button on the main site.
Webcontent is available via svn - "svn co
https://svn.openoffice.org/**svn/${project}~webcontent<https://svn.openoffice.org/svn/$%7Bproject%7D%7Ewebcontent>${project}"
(Thanks
Marcus Lange)
Some projects are huge and others small. I downloaded several:
I think "infrastructure" which is the project for all aspects dealing
with
the development of the old web site itself could be thrown out completely,
since, ta da, here we are in a new environment. And, much of that is VERY
old. Ditto for much of the "download" area which goes back to the
non-mirrors age.
The problem is, that we have many dead pages on the SVN. At Collabnet we
haven't the right to delete pages from the CVS. So many many unused site is
still on the SVN but you won't find it over the OOo webpage.
It might be useful to take the domains list....
https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/**
OpenOffice+Domains<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/OpenOffice+Domains>
and see what can be combined into your suggested categories below. Maybe
we
could start something like this as a seperate item off the "To Do" list on
the OOo-sitemap page. Oddly, some of these actual "virtual domains" are
really part of the main website -- web~webcontent.
I have already done a sitemap for all projects. It's only 4 month old. I do
this sitemap for the kenai migration. I will upload the list. It's a line
separated textfile.
The following page needs more fleshing out:
https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/**OOo-Sitemap<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/OOo-Sitemap>
wave@minotaur:~/ooo-test$ ls -1
development
documentation
download
projects
www
The size is 2.7GB.
It would be good to come up with a scripted way to convert existing
webcontent to either mdtext, an altered html, or specialized javascript
and
css. It is likely we can adapt the content and use the Apache CMS to wrap
a
standard skeleton.
Yes we need a script, but I think the Script can only do basic work. The
OOo Page is not so easy as it looks. Ther are many special features on the
kenai framework, and a load of JavaScript. I agree with Kai that we have to
be verry carefull.
Greatings Raphael
--
My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/
OK, a totally different thought/approach.
I think it might be easier in the long run to migrate the entire current OOo
site in total (well except for maybe a few areas/projects) and deal with the
revamping/reorg on a longer term basis -- culling out a bit at a time.
I think trying to deal with this NOW will considerably slow site migration
down, maybe even prevent it altogether and will considerably upset existing
users I think.
The biggest problem with this alternate approach, well really ANY approach,
is that folks that formerly had commit rights to sites, won't, because they
aren't committers. And now, with the (somewhat) recent migration to kenai,
it's a bit difficult to tell what was going on before that.
We should definitely think long term about migrating nearly all project home
pages to a wiki for easier maintenance. I think much of this had already
happened in actuality. People didn't want to deal with cvs/svn or anything
even remotely "techie" to participate.
Ther is a webbased CMS on Apache at http://cms.apache.org . Well it's
not a rich CMS, but you can edit a page without using SVN and Command
Line. I think cause the performance, a static page as main page is not a
bad idea. Markdown is much easier as html and as I said above, you don't
have to deal with svn for normal maintenance.
The problem that not all content developer has access to the Apache CMS
is true. The problem is, that the ASF dosn't make a difference between
Content Developer and Core Developer. At ASF that's the same status.
Become a Commiter it's not a fast proces. First you have to fill ICLA,
then you have to be voted in by PPMC, and finaly you have to wait for
the apache account. At the OOo Project you have only ask a Project Lead
for content defeloper right. Therefor you have access to the whole site
at Apache OOo.
Greetings Raphael
--
My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/
