On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Juergen Schmidt <jogischm...@googlemail.com > wrote:
> Am Samstag, 19. Mai 2012 um 00:18 schrieb Paulo de Souza Lima: > > 2012/5/18 Juergen Schmidt <jogischm...@googlemail.com> > > > > > Am Freitag, 18. Mai 2012 um 15:22 schrieb Paulo de Souza Lima: > > > > 2012/5/18 Jürgen Schmidt <jogischm...@googlemail.com> > > > > > > > > > On 5/18/12 10:32 AM, Kevin Grignon wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Erik, > > > > > > > > > > > > Good stuff. Will do. > > > > > > > > > > do we really need such a separate page for UX community members? I > > > don't > > > > > think so and I personally think it goes in the wrong direction. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There's nothing to loose, in my view. But I wouldn't call UX a > > > "community". > > > > I would call it a "team". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am personally interested in many different areas of the project > and > > > > > don't want to put my name on X different pages. My contribution in > the > > > > > different areas will be also different and will change from time to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you are interested in many areas (just like me) you are free to > decide > > > > if you will place your name in all of them, or none. I don't see a > > > > > > > > > > problem > > > > with that. But if I am deeply involved with some project, I would > like to > > > > place my name on it, for sure. Also, it's important from the user's > point > > > > of view, to know who are the contacts for the issues they have. And > a new > > > > contributor who wishes to have a larger involvement with the UX > > > > > > > > > > activities > > > > (and others too) should be able to identify who else is involved. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Such a page doesn't really reflect who is doing the work and is > > > > > potentially misleading. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Again, I don't think so. Indeed, it doesn't reflect who is doing the > job, > > > > but it gives a clue. It would be worst if users have no clue about > that. > > > > And Mediawiki has features that can give stronger clues. It's matter > of > > > > creating some sort of workflow. If there's a workflow, anyone can > drive > > > > > > > > > > his > > > > task, without the need of a "coordinator". I could give you an > example we > > > > done in LibO, but I preffer to show you our own example in AOO: Me > and > > > > > > > > > > Raul > > > > are about to finish a workflow for PT-BR document translations page > which > > > > is working very fine in LibO and we will make it work here too. When > > > > finished, anyone will be able to choose a document, translate it, > submit > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > for revise, revise translation, and all the work of every contributor > > > > > > will > > > > be recorded. > > > > > > > > > that sounds interesting but I don't see the relation to a > community/team > > > page > > > > > > > > > Well, As I told before, I would not call it a "community". I would call > it > > a "team" or, if this word sounds bad, maybe the UX "Guys" sounds better > =) > > > > How can you identify, today, people who are working on wiki maintenance, > > for example? Note I'm not asking for *all* people, but the main ones. I > > couldn't do that until I have created some pages and Adailton questioned > me > > about that. So I made a search in the wiki to find who made the last > > editions in the wiki, mainly after July 2011. And I found TJ. In his > > discussion page they used to change some messages, so I could find out > that > > TJ and Adailton are the "wiki guys". But this information was not > anywhere > > in a clear view. Why not ease the work of displaying who is doing what? > > > > > > > > > > > > This could be automated in certain level if we had a better wiki as I > > > have > > > > asked for some days ago. > > > > > > > > > sure better or improved tooling is always good but again where is the > > > relation to a people page? > > > > > > > > > Imagine you ask to the wiki: Who are the guys working on infra for the > last > > 2 months? Semantic searches can answer this question. And can reply it > > getting information from other systems, like CMS. > > Semantic features work on FAQs. We use semantic searches allied to a good > > ontology structure to answer questions people use to ask. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We have already a general project page with project members that > > > doesn't > > > > > reflect the current situation in the project. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree to this point, but I think a general list "too general" for > the > > > > average people. We should think about giving fast answers to AOO > users, > > > > instead making them navigate through uncountable pages to find what > they > > > > want. Do you have any idea of how difficult is for people to fill an > > > > > > > > > > issue > > > > in bugzilla, for example? Findind documentation either. And it's > worst > > > > > > for > > > > those who can't read/write in English. > > > > > > I do not disagree and I am fine with improving the workflow here. It > would > > > be great to have a simplified workflow to submit issues. So let us > think > > > about such improvements. The same for documentation. > > > > > > But do think that a page with some names will change anything here? > > > > It depends on who are managing that page. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In general such pages are useless from my point of view and get > > > outdated > > > > > very fast. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My personal/professional experience points to another direction. If > UX > > > has > > > > enthusiastic volunteers who take the task to themselves, they will > take > > > > care of their workspace. And I think there are very enthusiastic > people > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > this moment. And they wish to do that, but it will be useless if UX > > > > couldn't count on devs to hear what they have to say, because UX > should > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > the channel between users and devs. The enthusiasm can go down very > > > > > > quickly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree and it is and will not be easy, In the end the work have to be > > > done. That means that people have to convince other people from their > > > ideas. Especially when people are not able to implement it on their > own. > > > The better an idea is described and sold the better is the chance that > > > somebody will implement it. > > > > > > > > > I am preparing a little sample. If Mediawiki can be upgraded and the > > extensions I have asked for installed, Iĺl do that in PT-BR section. > > Otherwise, I'll do that in www.escritoriolivre.org/wiki > > > > > > When you volunteer to help with the wiki please join the infra structure > mailing list and join the infra IRC channel. Show your expertise there, ask > people and I am sure you will get the support and the access rights you > need over time. That's the way how it works at Apache. I did it in the same > way and got the rights I need for pootle. > > Just start doing the update by talking with the infra guys about it. What > your plans are, what your experience is etc. that you are able to maintain > the wiki or at least that you are I retested to help... > > Juergen > > > > > > > > > > > Juergen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > -- > > Paulo de Souza Lima > > http://almalivre.wordpress.com > > Curitiba - PR > > Linux User #432358 > > Ubuntu User #28729 > > > > > > Hello All, Thanks for interest in UX. As for name, I must admit that I'm new to the effort, and the guidance from PPMC and others, has, well, been subjective and contradictory at best. If the community wants to establish team/group/sub-community/gang naming protocols, then please share when available. For example, we were told to not use the term "team", as is was reserved for the PPMC "team". Then, we were told not to use community and use "team". As for UX guys", that is a non-starter for the obvious reasons. A key theme was that everyone wanted us not to fragment the broader team or community - which makes sense. However, we are trying to reinvigorate the UX effort and could really use your support right now to help us re-establish ourselves. Diversity is key to the health of the project, it's OK if some people want to focus on different aspect of the offering. Let's support each other in their individual pursuits, and work to connect such activity to the larger community. We will rename to "UX team", which is easiest and most appropriate. We will continue to use the [UX] email subject prefix, and only reference UX team in relation to UX-specific task assignments. Regards, Kevin
