Re: gnome app pages (was confusingly Gnome Software Map)
> > - authoritative > > by this i mean it will be the hopefully best maintained and relevant > > info source on an application relevant to gnome. People will of course > > be free to create an "official" website for their app, and publish it as > > they see fit. Yet, the wgo app pages would appear in a more-or-less > > uniform fashion, with some established guidelines. > OK. With this, I disagree. We're basically wanting developers and/or > volunteers to duplicate the information they have about the project. The URL can be canonical, but there's no point having two pages about a project. Going to the 'rhythmbox' URL on gnome.org [1] can simply redirect to the main rhythmbox web page. Hopefully they can implement similar things to the gnome.org pages (such as using DOAP for common data and structure), but it's all up to them. Like I said a few emails back, using gnome.org has to be made attractive for project maintainers - we can't just enforce it. So, authoritative/canonical -> no. But useful and reliable (as URLs that display or redirect to project pages) -> yes. [1] note that I am not writing the URL, because that's an implementation detail that we should determine from the design goals. > And this maybe a little off-topic, but why can't we have a "Wanted" > section in projects' homepage and tell the general public what we need > that we don't have right now. E.g.: If we can integrate useful information from our various sources for these pages [1], that's great. But there are all kinds of things we can do about this - first, we should design and ship something that is useful. Then we can add stuff. [1] and in doing so, provide the infrastructure for other project pages not hosted on gnome.org to use this information (such as rhythmbox aggregating wishlist bugs confirmed by the maintainer - similar to what you're talking about with 'wanted' information). - Jeff -- linux.conf.au 2007: Sydney, Australia http://lca2007.linux.org.au/ ... *bounce*bounce*bounce* -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: gnome app pages (was confusingly Gnome Software Map)
On Sat, 2006-05-08 at 12:49 +0200, Gergely Nagy wrote: > Hi, Hi. > > All right, so let's get back to basics :) We seem to need to do this, every now and then. > > Clearly, for these pages to make some sense at all, there has to be some > added value. Let's try to enumerate these first... > > - authoritative > by this i mean it will be the hopefully best maintained and relevant > info source on an application relevant to gnome. People will of course > be free to create an "official" website for their app, and publish it as > they see fit. Yet, the wgo app pages would appear in a more-or-less > uniform fashion, with some established guidelines. It will be possible > to make it a collaborative effort, where several people can make sure > the page is up do date and meeting some standards. > Perhaps the "official" web page will be more up-to-date, because > Changelogs appear within microseconds of a release, but people browsing > wgo/apps will hopefully get a uniform and still valid resource to > discover gnome apps. OK. With this, I disagree. We're basically wanting developers and/or volunteers to duplicate the information they have about the project. Then, when time comes, to delicately update the information (in their "official" site and in their wgo/apps site). I don't think this will work. I'm all about making developers lives easier and duplicating information will not help them out, unfortunately. I know it's not good to point out a problem without having a solution. Here is my solution: why don't we ask developers as to what they want for their project home page. What are they looking for in a CMS or a framework to make their project home page development easier. Many of these developers are coders and not web designers, if we get the gnome graphic designers to help these guys out, it'd be great for devs, users, and ultimately for the gnome image. Also, when you take a look at sourceforge, lots of projects have the default look and feel of sourceforge which is absolutely terrible and really bloated. This goes to show that [some | most] devs don't know and don't care about web and marketing. So I'm saying, find out what developers want from a home page system (if I may call it that), give it to them, and expect that wgo/apps page be the _official_ home page of the project that do choose to have a wgo/apps, otherwise we're just duplicating effort, in my opinion. On top of this, if we can find a better way to integrate bugzilla and these pages the developers, I think, would be happy. > In addition, it just looks more professional if you can reference a core > gnome app by an official gnome URL, may it be on an about box, manual, > banner, flier, blimp, super bowl, or other marketing blurb :) Absolutely correct. However, as it's been said, users wanting to visit the projects home shouldn't get wrist strain from typing in the URL :). > > - translated > The wgo infrastructure will offer the possibility to translate these > pages. Arguably these will not be the first pages translated, but I > believe it is a useful feature. As you say, these will not be on the translators' top to-do list. If I got to www.gnome.org/sq/epiphany and epiphany project page turns out untranslated, this will just confuse and even frustrate me and whenever I see "translated" in the future, I'll probably be sceptical. > - detail and structure > > we determine how such an app page is structured and what appears on it. > This will enhance interoperability, and give a uniform appeal of all the > pages. We cannot except this from "official" sites. (yeah, gnomefiles > has structure, but it has a different scope, and will never have all the > details we might need) Agreed. But, as you'll see above, I'm saying we should take this one step further. > > - scope > I imagine the app pages to be _not_ a "software map", that is a database > trying to list all gnome-relevant software. And in this respect I see no > competition with gnomefiles.org, on the contrary, an opportunity to > cooperate. I see no problem with competing with gnomefiles. I think we need to preserve our image and gnome trademarks, and if that will take competing with gnomefiles, so be it. gnomefiles has different goals than gnome. > It is also not a projects page, trac [1] style. Once we come around to > do prgo, we can just use these project management frameworks, off the > shelf. Their focus is to drive development efforts, and they do it well. > They do wikis, issue tracking, project management (timelines, > milestones, roadmaps, etc), repository integration, etc. Why can't it be the project page. Why can't we integrate the development efforts with the main project page? My goal is to not have duplicate information it just clogs up the Internet tubes. And this maybe a little off-topic, but why can't we have a "Wanted" section in projects' homepage and tell the general public what we need that we don't have right now. E.g.: Wanted: Graphic designe
Re: gnome app pages (was confusingly Gnome Software Map)
> > Gergely: s/applications/products/ - or you'll forget about a whole bunch > > of things that will need to fit in with this. :-) > > I can't think of any. You mean stuff like gnome-office? Maybe they deserve > their own space? Say wgo/office/? Ok, first, don't get hooked on URL implementation details. :-) Go back to my previous email where I mentioned desktop, embedded, platform, etc. They all deserve (need!) a product mini site. - Jeff -- linux.conf.au 2007: Sydney, Australia http://lca2007.linux.org.au/ "If you want to start a debate on a subject, however, all that seems to be necessary is to involve perennial target Richard Gooch." - LWN -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: WGO : GNOME Software Map
> This is the point of projects.gnome.org: better maintainability for prgo > and wgo as well. The point of my previous email was that "projects.gnome.org" is an implementation detail (and from my POV, not a good one). I understand all the arguments for it, but I just don't think it's relevant to the discussion at this point, and doesn't help us solve the problem. It's just a way to be distracted. - Jeff -- linux.conf.au 2007: Sydney, Australia http://lca2007.linux.org.au/ "You put on the pants, and the pants start telling you what to do." - Bono -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: gnome app pages (was confusingly Gnome Software Map)
An attempt to get conclusions from this interesting discussion. 1. DIFFERENT LAYERS AND GOALS - All the discussion refers to content located at www.gnome.org EXCEPT the wgo/project/* subsites that we are not going to touch at all in this release (and might or might not become projects.gnome.org). We are not talking either in this thread about touching livego, librarygo, developergo... Just to make it clear: we are not dealing in the current release with the projects subsites i.e. http://www.gnome.org/projects/evolution/ We can link to these project subsites and other relevant resources across *.gnome.org, but that's all by now. - http://live.gnome.org/GnomeWeb/SoftwareMap refers *only* to the development of one list of links to official GNOME product pages. This is the core mission of this goal. - The discussion product pages themselves belong to a different goal: http://live.gnome.org/GnomeWeb/ProjectsPages . It is still unassigned, someone wants to take it to make sure the sauce of the discussion is not lost and heads to a real implementation? A project page would be literally a single page (not a small website or something) managed primarily by the marketing team. A product page should have great information and marketing about a product (produced jointly with the developers, but I think it is our responsibility to assure their quality and update), plus all the relevant links links to know/do more about that product in the GNOME subsites. If a product has official website we link it. If it hasn't got one, at least the product will have now an official page (i.e. Pessulus). The product pages should be as translated as any other page at wgo. - The discussion about where this list fits in wgo, if user Joe is interested or not, belong to other goals: Define the content and scope of www.gnome.org and http://live.gnome.org/GnomeWeb/NewWgoStructure (both assigned to Joachim Noreiko. Also the idea of offering other sublists i.e. embedded, desktop, etc belong to these goals and doesn't affect that fact that we need a one and only official list somewhere (and it doesn't need to be in the homepage or where user Joe will click first). 2. "GNOME PRODUCTS": NOT A SOFTWARE MAP "Software map" is a wrong term. "GNOME products" is the best definition I've seen so far, although I feel that something is still missing. Let's use this term while we don't find anything better. "GNOME applications" has two problems: 1. maybe we want to list pieces or collections of software that are not strictly applications and the nerds will tell us we suck; 2. 'applications' is a non-familiar term for most regular users (they talk about 'software' or 'programs') and they will tell us we suck. In fact "GNOME software" is perhaps a good term to define the "official" products, specially when opposed to the broader "Software for GNOME", which can be found at gnomefiles.org. 3. A LIST OF "OFFICIAL" GNOME SOFTWARE wgo needs to explain the software that "makes" GNOME. We have at least two clear categories here: the components of the desktop (the ones shipped in the last release) and the applications (more complex to define, but we will take a pragmatic approach). There are two reasons to have this list: information (this is the list of GNOME products, GNOME says) and marketing (this is the software that makes GNOME great and GNOME explains why). We can't delegate GNOME information and marketing to third parties. I would even say that the marketing team can't leave this mission to the projects alone, or the release team, or... Developers can be great producing cool software, but it doesn't necessarily imply they are good at providing information and marketing about the software they produce. This list doesn't aim to compete with gnomefiles.org at all. Instead, we should collaborate together. Eugenia has been adapting improving gnomefiles.org to offer a friendly gateway to wgo. We should build our side from this gateway in the list(s) we create. The maximum number of products listed is probably the number of products with bugtracker in bugzilla.gnome.org, and I'm sure we could find other filters to make the list decrease (increasing the average quality of the products listed). In http://live.gnome.org/GnomeWeb/SoftwareMap there are currently 27 products listed. If you think there is a product missing add it now. 4. NOT THE ONLY LIST TO ACCESS THE PRODUCT PAGES The tresor are the product pages, not this official list of GNOME products. This official list will satisfy only some user profiles in some use cases. Jeff and Claus' concerns about other user profiles and other use cases can be solved, as Jeff suggested, having other pages focused in one aspect and offering their own list/gateway to selected product pages. The fact that Simon Rozet is working on the official list doesn't imply we can't have more. - There has been some discussion about more specific and technical details. I'm leaving them out now to ease a common
Re: WGO : GNOME Software Map
On Sat, 5 Aug 2006 10:22:55 +1000 Jeff Waugh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Where "easily satisfied" on my terms demands some introspective > thought and design. Just saying "whack up a home page" or "create > projects.gnome.org" does *not* satisfy my questions - in fact that's > the whole reason I've been asking them. > Both are independent tasks: Even if we create projects.gnome.org (which will have to wait until the SVN stuff is through anyway) and whack up a few homepages, you are still able to create a sort of design guideline, make this a GNOME goal or a goal of the next web release circle, and update these pages. However, if such a guideline is not created, it does not affect the ability of project maintainers to whack up a homepage. And they don't depend on decisions about CMSes or any other stuff discussed for wgo. This is the point of projects.gnome.org: better maintainability for prgo and wgo as well. Cheers, Claus -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: gnome app pages (was confusingly Gnome Software Map)
Hi, On Sat, 5 Aug 2006 16:02:23 +0100 (BST) Joachim Noreiko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > That's all too much technical detail for wgo, and it > will detract from pages aimed at users. > Some more thoughts about the topic: * What about the Windows port of Evolution? Say, a Windows uses googles for 'email client': What address should he get provided we could make Evolution one of the top links? wgo/apps/evolution ? * What about apps providing a plugin interface: Nautilus, gedit or Tomboy, for example. What's the sense in haveing a plugin interface if the user needs Google to find plugins? But which page should promote the plugins? * What about projects such as Dia: It's not part of the desktop release. Does it need a wgo/apps/dia page? Isn't this also confusing for wgo users? So: It's not just technical details that makes projects.gnome.org a necessity. A simple page like http://www.gnome.org/projects/gedit/ satiesfies your use cases and the ones above. And it would still do when moved to http://projects.gnome.org/gedit/. Cheers, Claus -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: gnome app pages (was confusingly Gnome Software Map)
On Sat, 2006-08-05 at 16:02 +0100, Joachim Noreiko wrote: > Suppose I am a potential developer, interested in > Nautilus. > I need to be directed towards pages that tell me... > > - who is currently working on nautilus > - how to communicate with them (mailing list, irc) > - what's in the development version > - what is being plannned for the future -- the roadmap > basically > - what are the current open tasks > - how to get my hands on source code > That's all too much technical detail for wgo, and it > will detract from pages aimed at users. > > Currently, this information is partly on wgo/projects, > and partly on live.g.o > > Where should it go? > library.g.o is not the place for it -- that's for > documentation. I think that's exactly what the projects.gnome.org should be about. The hive for (potential) developers. (Hmm, that would make one hell of a subdomain name, and it rhymes with live.gnome.org :)) Greg -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: gnome app pages (was confusingly Gnome Software Map)
Jeff Waugh wrote : > Secondly, as someone mentioned on this list only > a week or so ago, look at all the Apple product sites (also that you can get > info about almost any product using www.apple.com/Secondly, as someone mentioned on this list only Yeah, I really like the apple.com's way. For example, if you go to http://www.apple.com/safari, you are redirected towards http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/safari/. And a GNOME example : http://www.gnome.org/epiphany -> http://www.gnome.org/desktop/epiphany In each page of /desktop/, we can feature the app in a gnome-fashioned way. You know, like web2.0's "take a tour", with screenshots and/or screencasts. Gergely Nagy wrote : > - integration > So how can we integrate with other resources? > We can display the feed from gnomefiles.org and link there, to channel > visitors looking for the myriad of apps out there. We can link to, or > possibly slurp some data from the projects pages. Gnomefiles could be > used for general searching for apps, or displaying similar apps (e.g. > based on their categores), etc. Yeah, maybe we can provide a link like "Show me more applications of this category" or so. But I am not sure about that. I think that may disturb the user. - Simon -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: gnome app pages (was confusingly Gnome Software Map)
--- Gergely Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 2006-08-05 at 22:54 +1000, Jeff Waugh wrote: > > > > > > > --- Gergely Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I see wgo/apps/ page as an about box on > steroids. It would be _the_ pace > > > > to go to find out some basic info about a > gnome app. > > > > > > That's a good way of putting it :) > > > > > > Material that is currently in wgo/projects that > is more aimed at > > > developers should go on live.g.o, or whatever > lgo turns into. > > > > Disagree. A core function of our web presence is > attracting contributors and > > letting people know that the power of Free > Software can be theirs, too. We > > should have "how to get involved" information on > these pages. > > While this is globally true, the aim for wgo is to > provide good entry > points. Note that library.gnome.org (i think Joachim > meant that instead > of live.gnome.org) will be part of our web presence. > I think a how to > get involved link will suffice on these pages > (garnished by an inviting > sentence or paragraph of course :)... Actually, I did mean live.g.o Suppose I am a potential developer, interested in Nautilus. I need to be directed towards pages that tell me... - who is currently working on nautilus - how to communicate with them (mailing list, irc) - what's in the development version - what is being plannned for the future -- the roadmap basically - what are the current open tasks - how to get my hands on source code That's all too much technical detail for wgo, and it will detract from pages aimed at users. Currently, this information is partly on wgo/projects, and partly on live.g.o Where should it go? library.g.o is not the place for it -- that's for documentation. live.g.o is ugly, both visually and with its WikiWords. I agree with Shaun who said (somewhere) that it's great to use as a collective notepad, but we need something more. So that's either a projects.g.o, or a developer.g.o reborn from its ashes -- the name is a minor detail. Of course, a page on wgo about Nautilus would have a big link leading on to this developer space. ___ All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of use." - PC Magazine http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Hello world
Hi (again) Just joined the Gnome Foundation (and the foundation-list), and I've been spending some time deciding in which part of Gnome I fit better. I think I'll start with marketing, as that's what I've been doing for some years. Not too much to say right now, just a quick "hi" to everybody. greetings, Carlos -- Greetings from Carlos Fenollosa My weblog: http://weblog.topopardo.com PGP Public key: 0xEE6097FC -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: gnome app pages (was confusingly Gnome Software Map)
On Sat, 2006-08-05 at 22:54 +1000, Jeff Waugh wrote: > > > > --- Gergely Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I see wgo/apps/ page as an about box on steroids. It would be _the_ pace > > > to go to find out some basic info about a gnome app. > > > > That's a good way of putting it :) > > > > Material that is currently in wgo/projects that is more aimed at > > developers should go on live.g.o, or whatever lgo turns into. > > Disagree. A core function of our web presence is attracting contributors and > letting people know that the power of Free Software can be theirs, too. We > should have "how to get involved" information on these pages. While this is globally true, the aim for wgo is to provide good entry points. Note that library.gnome.org (i think Joachim meant that instead of live.gnome.org) will be part of our web presence. I think a how to get involved link will suffice on these pages (garnished by an inviting sentence or paragraph of course :)... > Gergely: s/applications/products/ - or you'll forget about a whole bunch of > things that will need to fit in with this. :-) I can't think of any. You mean stuff like gnome-office? Maybe they deserve their own space? Say wgo/office/? Greg -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: www.gnome.org - content, scope, structure
On Fri, 2006-08-04 at 21:00 -0600, Gezim Hoxha wrote: > On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 15:00 +0100, Joachim Noreiko wrote: > > I've signed up for two of the goals for 2.16, because > > they're closely related: > Here are my thoughts: > > I think no one should need to scroll in WGO page (with current page I > have 1200px height and I still have to scroll (a wee bit)). It's meant > to be a gateway and you're not supposed to spend too much time on the > index page. I think it should be separated into 3 sections, maybe using > tabs and allowing users to change from "user" to "developer" to > "business" (like http://www.suse.org does) or using images (maybe kind > of like http://www.redhat.com has the 3 images). I'd rather scroll a bit than click around. I really hate those docs (converted usually from docbook) where each chapter is half a paragraph on it's own page... Imagine you'd have to click for each post on planet gnome, brrr :) Splitting it up in sections is underway [1]. It's a bit understaffed effort, you could help out! > On top of these these tabs or images, we could have a flashy press > release or promo page or whatever you want to call it, for one of our > gnome "products" (why shouldn't we call them products?). > > I think two things lacking in the current gnome page is flashy images > and no attention is paid to developers and businesses. Since businesses > usually have a huge following (employees), a business converting would > mean so many people being exposed to gnome. So, I think we need to take > advantage of that. My vote is definitely against flashy images. IMHO it's distracting, unprofessional, and hard to maintain. > As far as developers, I don't think we're paying much attention to them. > I think the dev*.gnome.org page is a joke. We have a lot of work to do. Agreed. See library.gnome.org [2] effort. > Onto a little different topic, there is no reason people shouldn't know > about the gnome brand. It completely shocked me when almost all of the > student in my marketing class put up their hand when the prof asked who > had heard of intel. People should know about gnome too, at the very > least people using linux should know gnome. They've been around for quite some time now, have a huge budget, and a processor in pretty much everybody's computer (branded or compatible). That said, I totally agree with the second part :) On a second thought, I hope some people will just not have to care whether they have gnome, if they don't want to. I couldn't care less what software runs on my microwave, and I'm a geek :) > Anyway, those are my thoughts. Thanks for your input! Greg [1] http://live.gnome.org/GnomeWeb/GnomeOrgPartitioning [2] http://live.gnome.org/GnomeWeb/Library -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: GNOME project description for EuroOSCON .org day]
On Sat, 2006-08-05 at 14:36 +0100, Joachim Noreiko wrote: > > Comments? > > It's a lot clearer :) > > > Check from native speakers? > > 'comprise' never goes with 'of'. > 'Comprising hundreds of volunteer developers...' > > 'Target platforms are both the desktop as well > embedded devices.' > You don't need 'both' AND 'as well'. Okay, thanks! Remaining question: they need the GNOME logo in web and print resolution. A web logo is not too difficult to find, but in print resolution I don't know where to take it from. Marcus -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: GNOME project description for EuroOSCON .org day]
--- Marcus Bauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > << > > Comprised of hundreds of volunteer developers > and industry-leading > > companies, the GNOME Foundation is an organization > committed to > > supporting the advancement of GNOME. GNOME is a > free software project > > that provides a complete, easy to use desktop for > a variety of > > operating systems, including GNU/Linux, BSD, > Solaris (tm), Operating > > Environment, HP-UX, Unix, BSD and Apple's Darwin. > More than 700 > > computer developers, including over 100 full-time, > paid developers, > > contribute their time and effort to the project. > > >> > > New suggestion: > << > Comprised of hundreds of volunteer developers and > industry-leading > companies, GNOME is aiming to create a computing > environment for the > general public that is completely free software. > > Target platforms are both the desktop as well as > embedded devices. At > the same time GNOME is committed to enable people > with disabilities > through an elaborated Accessibility framework as the > result of several > years of effort. > >> > > Comments? It's a lot clearer :) > Check from native speakers? 'comprise' never goes with 'of'. 'Comprising hundreds of volunteer developers...' 'Target platforms are both the desktop as well embedded devices.' You don't need 'both' AND 'as well'. ___ Yahoo! Photos NEW, now offering a quality print service from just 7p a photo http://uk.photos.yahoo.com -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
GNOME project description for EuroOSCON .org day]
> << > Comprised of hundreds of volunteer developers and industry-leading > companies, the GNOME Foundation is an organization committed to > supporting the advancement of GNOME. GNOME is a free software project > that provides a complete, easy to use desktop for a variety of > operating systems, including GNU/Linux, BSD, Solaris (tm), Operating > Environment, HP-UX, Unix, BSD and Apple's Darwin. More than 700 > computer developers, including over 100 full-time, paid developers, > contribute their time and effort to the project. > >> New suggestion: << Comprised of hundreds of volunteer developers and industry-leading companies, GNOME is aiming to create a computing environment for the general public that is completely free software. Target platforms are both the desktop as well as embedded devices. At the same time GNOME is committed to enable people with disabilities through an elaborated Accessibility framework as the result of several years of effort. >> Comments? Check from native speakers? -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: gnome app pages (was confusingly Gnome Software Map)
> --- Gergely Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I see wgo/apps/ page as an about box on steroids. It would be _the_ pace > > to go to find out some basic info about a gnome app. > > That's a good way of putting it :) > > Material that is currently in wgo/projects that is more aimed at > developers should go on live.g.o, or whatever lgo turns into. Disagree. A core function of our web presence is attracting contributors and letting people know that the power of Free Software can be theirs, too. We should have "how to get involved" information on these pages. Gergely: s/applications/products/ - or you'll forget about a whole bunch of things that will need to fit in with this. :-) - Jeff -- linux.conf.au 2007: Sydney, Australia http://lca2007.linux.org.au/ It's not a disease, it's an occupation! -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: gnome app pages (was confusingly Gnome Software Map)
--- Gergely Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I see wgo/apps/ page as an about box on steroids. It > would be _the_ pace > to go to find out some basic info about a gnome app. That's a good way of putting it :) Material that is currently in wgo/projects that is more aimed at developers should go on live.g.o, or whatever lgo turns into. ___ Copy addresses and emails from any email account to Yahoo! Mail - quick, easy and free. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/trueswitch2.html -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
gnome app pages (was confusingly Gnome Software Map)
Hi, All right, so let's get back to basics :) Clearly, for these pages to make some sense at all, there has to be some added value. Let's try to enumerate these first... - authoritative by this i mean it will be the hopefully best maintained and relevant info source on an application relevant to gnome. People will of course be free to create an "official" website for their app, and publish it as they see fit. Yet, the wgo app pages would appear in a more-or-less uniform fashion, with some established guidelines. It will be possible to make it a collaborative effort, where several people can make sure the page is up do date and meeting some standards. Perhaps the "official" web page will be more up-to-date, because Changelogs appear within microseconds of a release, but people browsing wgo/apps will hopefully get a uniform and still valid resource to discover gnome apps. In addition, it just looks more professional if you can reference a core gnome app by an official gnome URL, may it be on an about box, manual, banner, flier, blimp, super bowl, or other marketing blurb :) - translated The wgo infrastructure will offer the possibility to translate these pages. Arguably these will not be the first pages translated, but I believe it is a useful feature. - detail and structure we determine how such an app page is structured and what appears on it. This will enhance interoperability, and give a uniform appeal of all the pages. We cannot except this from "official" sites. (yeah, gnomefiles has structure, but it has a different scope, and will never have all the details we might need) - scope I imagine the app pages to be _not_ a "software map", that is a database trying to list all gnome-relevant software. And in this respect I see no competition with gnomefiles.org, on the contrary, an opportunity to cooperate. The exact policy on what to include here is up for discussion, but the principal guideline should be what is most relevant for gnome. Again, this is not the scope of gnomefiles.org, where the focus is on as many apps as possible. Another policy can be to include only mature apps, whereas gnomefiles can host them as soon as they release 0.0.1-alpha. Also, on wgo we can convey default app policy, say our media player _is_ totem, whereas gnomefiles.org would obviously do no such thing. It is also not a projects page, trac [1] style. Once we come around to do prgo, we can just use these project management frameworks, off the shelf. Their focus is to drive development efforts, and they do it well. They do wikis, issue tracking, project management (timelines, milestones, roadmaps, etc), repository integration, etc. I see wgo/apps/ page as an about box on steroids. It would be _the_ pace to go to find out some basic info about a gnome app. You can go to gnomefiles.org to see what else is out there, or the project pages to get in the gory details, or the "official" page to see that too, if you want. The thing is, not all apps have an official page, esp. core gnome apps... - integration So how can we integrate with other resources? We can display the feed from gnomefiles.org and link there, to channel visitors looking for the myriad of apps out there. We can link to, or possibly slurp some data from the projects pages. Gnomefiles could be used for general searching for apps, or displaying similar apps (e.g. based on their categores), etc. We can integrate with the apps, in the about box, bug-buddy, manual pages, etc. For example, the intro of an app could be authored together with the manual, and extracted for the wgo page. Or if the manual pages ever go online, they could be truly cross-referenced. We can also integrate with distros. Point users at them for installing or any distro-specific issues, such as support. Distros could point back to us as "upstream", say in package info files... - all your app are not belong to us since gnomefiles.org already exists, and does a great job, it does not make sense to create a host'em all apps site. we should only focus on truly gnomey apps :) Greg [1] http://trac.edgewall.org/ -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: [Fwd: [Foundations] EuroOSCON .org day]
On Fri, 2006-08-04 at 17:44 +1000, Jeff Waugh wrote: > > > > EurOSCon is reserving place for free software projects to present in > > Amsterdam this year - is there any interest in a GNOME stand there? > > > > My initial feeling is "no" - from what I've seen, the OSCons aren't > > particularly desktop oriented, or necessarily free *nix oriented. > > In the past, I would have agreed, but having just returned from OSCON in the > USA, and seen the massive shift in OS X vs. Ubuntu there, I think it would > have made a lot of sense to have a GNOME presence. EuroOSCON is different > again in that it has a much more European slant - there are a lot more Linux > users in the crowd than at OSCON in the USA. I think it would be worthwhile > showing off what we're doing at EuroOSCON. I have contacted them and we do get a table and two easels for a GNOME stand. They currently have the following description for the GNOME project on file and I was wondering if there is a newer one: << Comprised of hundreds of volunteer developers and industry-leading companies, the GNOME Foundation is an organization committed to supporting the advancement of GNOME. GNOME is a free software project that provides a complete, easy to use desktop for a variety of operating systems, including GNU/Linux, BSD, Solaris (tm), Operating Environment, HP-UX, Unix, BSD and Apple's Darwin. More than 700 computer developers, including over 100 full-time, paid developers, contribute their time and effort to the project. >> Plus they need a high res logo for the brochures. Is there one available for download? Last not least: anybody else on the list interested in manning the stand? I'll otherwise contact the Brussels LUG and see to get one or two more people from there. Marcus -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
