Re: [libreoffice-website] Forward to wrong DICTIONARIES URL

[Andrea Pescetti]

webmaster for Kracked Press Productions wrote:

On 10/31/2011 04:24 AM, Rainer Bielefeld wrote:

Andrea Pescetti schrieb:

The right issue link is:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42408

Argh, of course!

I mentioned this many months ago. It seems to point to the OOo site that
is always down.


No, this is a different problem and it's related to the new LibreOffice 
extensions site. But all information can be found at the link above.


Regards,
  Andrea.

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] Forward to wrong DICTIONARIES URL

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 31/10/2011 07:29, Rainer Bielefeld wrote:

Dictionaries download is broken, please urgently see
"Bug 42408 - the address referred by tools -> languages -> more
dictionaries online doesn't work"



The right issue link is:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42408

Regards,
  Andrea.

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] Conference Management System for our next LibreOffice Conference

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 20/10/2011 Andreas Mantke wrote:

I propose for a wiki page, where we can collect all the requirements for our 
new CMS.
I think it would help, if the teams from the last OOo/LibreOffice conferences 
would
jump in and share there thoughts / experience / needs.


My only experience (when organizing OOoCon 2009 in Orvieto) was that 
most people were really uncomfortable with the system John McCreesh and 
Florian had setup, i.e., http://pkp.sfu.ca/ocs ; unless it hasn't 
undergone substantial usability changes now, OCS is probably a 
suboptimal solution for this kind of conference.


For the rest, pretty much any CMS will do... ultimately it will mostly 
depend on having knowledgeable administrators on board.


Regards,
  Andrea.

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] Error in license page

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 05/08/2011 Italo Vignoli wrote:

New contributions are LGPLv3+/MPL, so I do not think that the "or later"
has any specific meaning. The + after the license means that once a new
version of the license is available the contribution does not need to be
re-licensed as the license is automatically updated to the new version.


For the record, I don't think this is the interpretation code 
contributors give to "LGPLv3+" (I don't believe they mean it to be 
"automatically updated"); anyway, this won't make any practical 
difference until a new LGPL license is released, and the phrasing issue 
has now been closed, so the problem is solved as far as the website is 
concerned.


Regards,
  Andrea.

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] Error in license page

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 05/08/2011 Christian Lohmaier wrote:

I changed the page to read:
"LibreOffice is licensed under the terms of the LGPLv3 (new
contributions are dual-licensed under both LGPLv3+ and MPL)."


OK, since this seems stable I've just updated 
http://it.libreoffice.org/download/licenza accordingly.


Thanks,
  Andrea.

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] activation of my account

[Andrea Pescetti]

Jonathan Aquilina wrote:

On 8/10/11 1:04 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:

a few days ago. I was able to:
- Register to the website
- Set my password
- Propose a new project and request that it was published
- [ It was indeed published by some unknown administrator ]
- Create and publish a release  ...

Andrea are the user names and passwords tied in wiht the main LO wiki?


By "Register to the website", I mean that I created a new account; it is 
unrelated to my wiki account.


I then received an activation e-mail as follows:
  ---
  Subject: User Account Information for LibreOffice Extensions and 
Templates

  From: Extensionsite-Administrator 

    Welcome Andrea Pescetti,

your user account has been created.
Your username is ...
Please activate it by visiting ...
  ---
and everything worked as expected.

I don't have any experience with Plone so I can't help you further.

Regards,
  Andrea.

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] activation of my account

[Andrea Pescetti]

Rainer Bielefeld wrote:

My suggestion: report a bug (Details you find on
.
If someone else will have the same problem, he will be cheered up a
little seeing that he is not alone ;-)


Since it seems that only a handful of people registered so far, I'll 
just add the reassuring remark that everything worked correctly for me a 
few days ago. I was able to:

- Register to the website
- Set my password
- Propose a new project and request that it was published
- [ It was indeed published by some unknown administrator ]
- Create and publish a release

You can find the final result at
http://extensions-test.libreoffice.org/extension-center/italian-dictionary-thesaurus-hyphenation-patterns
and everything worked normally for me; so I expect that this basic 
workflow should work for others too.


Regards,
  Andrea.

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] Reviewer for the new template and extension repository

[Andrea Pescetti]

Andreas Mantke wrote:

The reviewer should look about the license and that the project intent
to be usefull for LibO (not spam, joke etc.). If we look later at the
files, we had to test, if they work with specific versions of LibO. But
that is not the task for the reviewer, when he decides if he publishe
the project or not.


Actually, if I got it right when uploading this extension (everything 
worked nicely, great!)

http://extensions-test.libreoffice.org/extension-center/italian-dictionary-thesaurus-hyphenation-patterns
the reviewer won't have license information available, since this 
information is not asked for when creating the project but when creating 
a specific release, which is only possible after the project has been 
approved.


So a reviewer must probably decide based on common sense rather than on 
the license, and then he must monitor the first releases.


Regards,
  Andrea.

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] Error in license page

[Andrea Pescetti]

Florian Effenberger wrote:

Andrea Pescetti wrote on 2011-08-05 10:30:

minimal and straightforward: use the same license
indication in http://www.libreoffice.org/download/license/ and in the
page footer, i.e., remove the wrong "(or later)" from the text.


hm, I'm not sure, but didn't we have this "or later" paragraph for new
contributions? Wasn't it a combination of LGPLv3 or later and the MPL?


See the issue as:
- The text of http://www.libreoffice.org/download/license/ reads "LGPLv3 
(or later)"

- The footer of the same page reads "LGPLv3".
- Being different, at least one of them is wrong.

I though LibreOffice was distributed under LGPLv3... the license used 
for distribution of the whole package is not, if I recall correctly, the 
same one as the one used for new contributions.


Then, if we even don't know which license is used for distributing 
LibreOffice, this is rather embarrassing and out of the scope of this 
list... Really, it was a totally straightforward two-words fix and I 
couldn't imagine any kind of discussion on it!


I now reset the Italian translation so that it is equally inconsistent 
as the English version; once this issue is settled, it would be great if 
someone continues this thread and tells us the right phrasing for the 
footer and the page text. We will update the Italian translation 
accordingly.


Regards,
  Andrea.

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] Error in license page

[Andrea Pescetti]

As suggested by Bernhard on another list, I'm sending a gentle reminder 
about the issue below (I exceptionally repost the full message, for 
clarity). It is minimal and straightforward: use the same license 
indication in http://www.libreoffice.org/download/license/ and in the 
page footer, i.e., remove the wrong "(or later)" from the text.


I fixed it in the Italian translation, but if there are reasons to keep 
"(or later)" in the Italian version too we will comply.


Regards,
  Andrea.

On 18/06/2011 Andrea Pescetti wrote:

While working on the Italian translation of the license page, I saw that
http://www.libreoffice.org/download/license/ states that "LibreOffice is
licensed under the terms of the LGPLv3 (or later)".

The "(or later)", unless something really unexpected happened right now,
is just wrong and it should be removed.

Regards,
   Andrea.




--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] LibreOffice Extension-Template-Website with new Layout/Logo

[Andrea Pescetti]

Andreas Mantke wrote:

Am Dienstag, 26. Juli 2011, 21:46:17 schrieb Olivier Hallot:

- the plone logo in the url line or browser tab should be changed for TDF
logo, no? I bet you already noticed that... :-)


if you have a link to the favicon, I can incorporate it into the new layout. I 
can't
find a link to the tdf-favicon.


It should simply be http://www.documentfoundation.org/favicon.ico , 
isn't it?


Regards,
  Andrea.

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] LibO-Ext-Templ-Website: Status Update and Asking for Proposals

[Andrea Pescetti]

Andreas Mantke wrote:
> because we had to set up our repository asap, because the OOo-Ext-
> Repo seemed to pass away soon.

Actually, on a side note, by one of those incredible coincidences it
seems that http://extensions.services.openoffice.org is in great shape
now, since the OSUOSL guys fixed the problem just today.

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: LibreOffice-Extensions-Template-Website

[Andrea Pescetti]

Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
> 2011/7/3 Andreas Mantke 
> > GPL|GPL - GNU General Public License|
> > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/GPL/2.0/
> > LGPL|LGPL - GNU Lesser General Public License|
> > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/LGPL/2.1/
> > BSD|BSD License (revised)|http://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license
> > Freeware|Freeware|http://wikipedia.org/Freeware
> > Public Domain|Public Domain|
> > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain
> > OSI|Other OSI Approved|http://opensource.org/licenses
> >
> > Is there something we should add or change?
> I think it's fine.

No, I think "Freeware" (besides the typo in the corresponding link) must
be removed, since it goes against the stated policy (or to the closest
thing we have, i.e., RMS's statement on the website).

Or, as I wrote, let people be able to select it but then refuse the
submission when they click "Submit".

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] LibreOffice-Extensions-Template-Website

[Andrea Pescetti]

Andreas Mantke:
> Am Montag, 27. Juni 2011, 19:02:42 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
> > For usability, I'd prefer not to have a default here. Otherwise, people
> > may overlook the field and it might well happen that someone uploads an
> > extension that gets tagged as "GPL" but actually has (within the OXT
> > file) a totally different license.
> 
> I changed the field, in which the contributor choose the license, from drop 
> down to 
> radio format. I added also a warning text to the description of the field:
> http://andreasmaooo.blogger.de/stories/1848120/

Thanks Andreas, this is a significant improvement: sloppy authors will
now have to be aware of that field.

It's unfortunate that something released with the same license as the
LibreOffice new files cannot be uploaded properly due to the need to
choose only one license, but limitations due to the tools (something
that I cannot understand in general) will maybe be overcome in future.

Coming to the contents, I have 3 questions about your screenshot:
- "Freeware" will block the upload, right? I.e., if someone chooses
  "Freeware" then the extension submission will be refused.
- Why is "Commercial License" in the list? GPL, LGPL and the other
  options listed are (also) commercial licenses, so it's redundant.
- I don't really want to start any discussions about this, but I'm not
  aware of a large number of extensions distributed under the "Zope
  Public License" while I would, say, expect that there will be
  extensions contributed under the Apache License. Of course the Apache
  License can fit in the category of "Approved by OSI" and "Approved by
  FSF", but maybe it deserves its own option. If this has already been
  examined, just ignore it. The first extension I'm going to contribute
  is under GPLv3 anyway...

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] LibreOffice-Extensions-Template-Website

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 24/06/2011 Andreas Mantke wrote:
> the license has to be specified for every release inside the project.
> The default license is GPL, if the author don't change.

(Resending, it seems it was not delivered... sorry if you get it twice)

For usability, I'd prefer not to have a default here. Otherwise, people
may overlook the field and it might well happen that someone uploads an
extension that gets tagged as "GPL" but actually has (within the OXT
file) a totally different license.

Regards,
  Andrea.



-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] LibreOffice-Extensions-Template-Website

[Andrea Pescetti]

Marc Paré wrote:
> Regarding one of those items on the wiki page: "Extension transfer from 
> OOo repository ", we should make sure that if we do this that we try to 
> find the author of the extensions to give proper attribution. When I 
> looked at the templates and hoped to transfer some from the OOo site, 
> most of these did not have the author's contact

As for the extensions, they are ZIP files and you can often (not always,
unfortunately) unzip them and find a README.txt file with author names
and contact details.

As for templates, the policy of templates.services.openoffice.org forces
some document properties to be filled in in the file itself before you
can upload a template. By inspecting the document properties, you will
find some details; the templates I uploaded are complete with contact
details, but I'm not sure about the rest.

> we should include in our documentation of any of the submissions of 
> extensions/templates that the author's email is part of the contributing 
> form.

I think it's smarter to actually inspect the file, because this way the
basic information is embedded in the template and is carried around
every time it is copied. This is one of the nice things that make
templates.services.openoffice.org an interesting site (just in terms of
underlying technology).

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] LibreOffice-Extensions-Template-Website

[Andrea Pescetti]

Italo Vignoli wrote:
> On 6/19/11 11:25 AM, Marc Paré wrote:
> > Could you suggest another description that we could use that would be
> > more appropriate for us?
> I think that we should use "free software license, preferably copyleft"

Just "free software license" linked to
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html would exactly match with the
RMS quote on http://www.documentfoundation.org/supporters/ and would
include both free-permissive licenses (Apache) and free-copyleft
licenses (LGPL). 

Anything else would be a new interpretation of the original statement
and would exclude (or discourage) some free software from the extensions
repository, but of course the Steering Committee is free to decide on
the policy of the LibreOffice websites regardless of RMS's quotes from
months ago.

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[libreoffice-website] Error in license page

[Andrea Pescetti]

While working on the Italian translation of the license page, I saw that
http://www.libreoffice.org/download/license/ states that "LibreOffice is
licensed under the terms of the LGPLv3 (or later)".

The "(or later)", unless something really unexpected happened right now,
is just wrong and it should be removed.

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] LibreOffice-Extensions-Template-Website

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 17/06/2011 Andreas Mantke wrote:
> We need a proposal for the text on this home page that explains what 
> extensions and 
> templates are used for, why they are so helpfull. Then the user of the site 
> should be 
> encouraged to provide extensions and templates to the new site.

The text should probably also emphasize that the Document Foundation
will not recommend nonfree add-ons, as per RMS's quote on
http://www.documentfoundation.org/supporters/

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] [Proposal] A central employment-office-like web structure for LibO volunteers

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 23/05/2011 Gianluca Turconi wrote:
> since few days I'm discussing a proposal about the creation of a  
> employment-office-like collaboration tool for LibO volunteers. Here is my  
> original proposal:
> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Website/LibreOfficeWiki/Proposed#Central_Employment-office-like_Web_Structure_for_LibreOffice_Volunteers

It's a very interesting proposal, but I find it still too unspecified to
start assessing tools (nobody wants lengthy discussions) or building
broken-but-you-get-the-idea prototypes and castrating the project due to
the constraints of a semi-random tool choice.

These are the first 10 items that, after reading all related discussions
I got exposed to in all mailing lists, I believe should be included in
the proposal before thinking about tools or prototypes:

1) The site must be fun to use. Not easy to use: FUN to use. It's a site
for hundreds of people, not for the few that are highly committed and
would contribute even without it. This must be priority #1 in design.

2) Success should not depend on developers using this site. LibreOffice
developers, rightfully, oppose everything that could hinder their
productivity, and reserve to choose their tools. There's plenty of
non-developers tasks and the site could now really focus on these only.

3) The site must provide Faceted search for tasks: one can progressively
narrow down the results to find all tasks needing knowledge of Italian
and less than a day and easy-medium difficulty, by clicking suitable
values on the "Language", "Duration" and "Difficulty" panels. In images:
http://www.lucidimagination.com/files/image/articles/faceting/CNET_faceted_search.jpg
(just found with a search engine, I'm not affiliated with that site).

4) It shouldn't be necessary to register; optimally, the site would just
use cookies like bit.ly does, at least for the first session.

5) Cooperating should be rewarding; not (or not only) money as specified
in the proposal, but bonus points that allow to identify the best
contributors (may conflict with 4, but there could be some hybrid way,
i.e., asking for an e-mail account and "registering" users this way, by
sending them an e-mail in background).

6) The site must support free tagging: if the Italian community wants to
post a series of tasks tagged "libo34it", they should be able to do it.

7) There must be an interface to clone an existing task. Optimally, to
clone a series of existing tasks. I envision Italo having to clone all
the "Translate LibreOffice 3.3.3 Release Notes to Italian/French/German"
tasks to the corresponding 3.3.4 ones with one click.

8) Links should be easy to refer and use, like
http://SITENAME.libreoffice.org/task/308
http://SITENAME.libreoffice.org/tasks/308+313+318+323
http://SITENAME.libreoffice.org/tag/libo34it
so that people could refer to "task 308" and link to it easily.

9) Upon marking a task completed, the system should select the closest
ones and propose them as further work. Like YouTube, if you wish.

10) The site must be based on Free Software infrastructure, and this is
not really a limit since there are plenty of systems allowing your
requirements and my requirements.

Sorry if I made a step backwards and brought the discussion back to
specifications, but before assessing tools I think a clearer vision is
needed: as I wrote, this is not an ordinary site for specialists but an
inclusive platform for the masses, and it needs extra care in planning;
if you don't think so, just go on with prototypes, no problem.

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: Links to Extensions

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 12/05/2011 Sophie Gautier wrote:
> On 12/05/2011 01:32, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> > I kind of expected that a new site development would have been announced
> > here.
> 
> it seems that it's just what Andreas did ;) Consider it like Litmus, we 
> test the tool, try some dev on it to make sure it's the one that will 
> satisfy our needs, a rough dev is first done and then presented to the 
> community to see if everything is ok.

OK, this is an understandable choice. Managing Extensions and Templates
can be a bit more difficult than what one expects, so the "just do it"
approach might not be the best, but it is surely acceptable and it
indeed avoids discussion.

> So now that Andreas has announce it, please, don't hesitate to test and 
> give your feedback.

Andreas appropriately described the current version as "very alpha":
this site (at this stage; I'm sure it will get better!) is definitely
not comparable to Thorsten Bosbach's new sites at OOo, and not even to
Michael Wheatland's prototypes from months ago. The chosen technology
does not allow me to give any useful feedback before the site enters RC
stage, but once it is in RC I'll try and upload my extensions there and
provide feedback. Just don't forget to announce on this list when it
enters RC, and congratulations to Andreas for the effort!

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: Links to Extensions

[Andrea Pescetti]

Andreas Mantke wrote:
> I'm working on such an environment for LibreOffice for some weeks in
> my spare time. I hope to solve some bugs in the product, that I
> created for this purpose.

Ah, surprise! I admit I find it weird that there is a test website in
the .libreoffice.org hierarchy active since March or earlier, and a code
repository in the official hierarchy active since April, without any
notifications to this list. I understand that the Steering Committee
must have had their good reasons for this "silent" development, but I
kind of expected that a new site development would have been announced
here.

Honestly I still like Thorsten Bosbach's new port of the existing
Templates/Extensions infrastructure more (and I wrote months ago that I
don't see the reasons for a dedicated LibreOffice extensions site, but
again I understand those who support this idea); you surely deserve to
be thanked for the effort, anyway, and I'm looking forward to seeing the
final result when the site is publicly announced!

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: Links to Extensions

[Andrea Pescetti]

Alexander Thurgood wrote:
> "USERS BEWARE : the extensions site
> appears to be currently suffering from availability issues", etc, this
> does not actually solve the underlying problem. A quick whois tells me
> that the servers are registered to Sun (no surprise there), so we remain
> dependent on the goodwill of an Oracle (Sun) controlled server to be
> able to continue to access extensions.

The Extensions server is not owned or operated by Oracle, but by the
Oregon State University Open Source Lab. At least, it used to be this
way and I have no indications that this has changed. I don't exactly
know what kind of whois you ran, but

$ host extensions.services.openoffice.org
extensions.services.openoffice.org is an alias for oooapps.osuosl.org.
oooapps.osuosl.org has address 140.211.166.72

> Are our resources so constrained that we can not, could not, provide
> such an infrastructure ourselves ?

Thorsten Bosbach from Oracle made a huge effort to port the Templates
and Extensions websites to Drupal 6 (they currently run the obsolete and
not so scalable Drupal 5), see
http://openoffice.org/projects/extensions/lists/websites/archive/2011-04/message/2
Originally, these were scheduled to replace the Drupal 5 sites this
month; I don't know when and if this will actually happen, but this
would be the way to go.

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] Upcomming LibOConference: Conference Tool

[Andrea Pescetti]

Andreas Mantke wrote:
> He gave me also a link to a site which compared the available open source 
> conference 
> managing systems:
> http://feeding.cloud.geek.nz/2010/05/list-of-open-source-conference.html

That post does not list COD (it's mentioned in the comments), a free,
open-source and no-cost solution I've seen around quite a few times:
http://usecod.com/ 

Example of a COD site: https://2011.ddcla.org/

> I think we should in front of the call for papers look for such a conference 
> managing 
> system, because it will be easier to get the right start. In my opinion we 
> need such 
> a tool

Yes, but more than the tool itself it's important that the organizers
are willing and able to use it. For example, the tool you cite was used
for the OOoCon 2009 too, but it was not met with enthusiasm by
organizers and in the end we found out it created a number of practical
problems in getting our work done.

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: On forums for LibreOffice

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 28/04/2011 Christian Lohmaier wrote:
> fragmentation of the knowledge, etc. There just is no point in
> creating more and more forums.

I agree on this.

> The problem is with the ads the libreofficeforum.org uses.

Yes, so far. But once this is solved, there could still be problems with
the domain name and the LibreOffice Trademark Policy
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TradeMark_Policy
("Non Permitted Use: ... any way that indicates a greater degree of
association between you and TDF than actually exists"). But I don't know
how this and other parts of the Trademark Policy must be interpreted in
concrete terms.

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: Version 3.3.1 New Features and Version 3.3.0

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 23/02/2011 Nino Novak wrote:
> As LibO is a downstream derivate of OOo, apparently any feature from
> OOo makes or can make it into LibO (unless removed by the LibO devs
> for some reason - is there any???)

Existing OpenOffice.org features that have been removed, deprecated or
are rumored to be removed soon from LibreOffice according to posts in
the developers' list include: exporting into some formats; updating
dictionaries as extensions; inserting and playing videos through the
embedded media player; macro recorder.

> but LibO-specific features do mostly *not* flow back into OOo 
> (obviously for Licensing reasons).

To be really nitpicking, the license itself would allow it; it's the
OpenOffice.org policy that forbids it.

> (Are there any exceptions? Is there 
> a developer who wants his code go into OOo, too?)

This is being discussed here:
http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss@documentfoundation.org/msg05178.html

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: RE : [libreoffice-website] Re: On forums for LibreOffice

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 31/01/2011 drew wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-01-31 at 07:56 +0100, Stefan Weigel wrote:
> > For me, there is absolutely nothing against presenting support for
> > LibreOffice at sites that use OpenOffice.org branding.

I'd say I agree with Stefan's opinion here; but in general my point
would be that the rebranding will mean a significantly reduced
visibility in search engines (since all links will point to the old
site), with the effect of hiding the work of volunteers over years; so
while a rebranding could make sense in theory, I see some practical
problems with it (problems that did not apply for instance to
OOoAuthors: there the rebranding is welcome and does not damage users).

> I can tell you with absolute certainty that some of the people
> responsible for the decision to support Libo on OO.o project specific
> sties are doing so out of the same feeling of inclusiveness they applied
> when supporting Go-OO and NeoOffice. Further that during the discussion
> to do so there was at no time an agreement in any way that Libo = OO.o

Yes Drew, and this is the cooperation spirit I see on the Italian forum
now; everyone gives support to everyone for the common parts, and
specificities are covered correctly and peacefully.

> but there was and is the acceptance that the time will come when the two
> products are not close enough to be supported on a single site.

This seems a rather forward-looking statement. When the time comes that
the shared codebase is really tiny I'll agree on this, but I don't see
it happening reasonably early (say, in 2011). Splitting a community that
is not split (i.e., making two sites out of one) would likely need to be
justified by a real difference in code.

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: RE : [libreoffice-website] Re: On forums for LibreOffice

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 28/01/2011 Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
> It's especially the last one in the list but they could get a new url soon,
> so stay tuned.

Would it really make sense? I perfectly agree with a domain name change
in cases like oooauthors.org -> odfauthors.org, but relocating
http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/
i.e. a forum with 38000 users, seems to me a big move however smooth the
migration can be: search results will need be reindexed and the forum
will lose visibility for what in the end is a purely political issue,
since the forum "neutrality" is clearly stated in the header and is
clearly shown in practice in the threads (at least in the Italian
forum).

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

RE: [libreoffice-website] [Drupal] The road ahead and missed opportunities

[Andrea Pescetti]

Narayan Aras wrote:
> And yet LibO requires full download for each version.
> Immediately after taking over, Oracle made OOo upgradable.
> Oracle cares about this. We don't. 
> We pander to the contributors instead.
> How much time was devoted to making LibO upgradable with patches?

For what is relevant to this thread, this is incorrect. OOo
(OpenOffice.org) will still require a full download to be updated, in
version 3.3 too - otherwise the feature would have been included in
LibreOffice 3.3 like virtually everything else from OpenOffice.org 3.3.

Incremental upgrades are in the proprietary product named "Oracle Open
Office", that is the new name of "StarOffice" and is distinct from
OpenOffice.org, of course.

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: new features page ...

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 14/01/2011 Sophie Gautier wrote:
> a small amount of Go-oo 
> features have been incorporated for now. More will come later, once
> our users base is consolidated.

Really? I expected most of the Go-OO features had made their way into
LibreOffice, or at least http://planet.go-oo.org/ made me think so.

Users of Linux-based systems who use the pre-installed OpenOffice.org
packages are in many cases using something that is branded
"OpenOffice.org" but that is closer to Go-OO than to the pristine
OpenOffice.org. And often they are not aware of it.

So if significant Go-OO features have been removed (or not integrated,
depending on how you see it) in LibreOffice, a section about this should
be included in the Features page to help the former users of Go-OO.

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [libreoffice-website] [Drupal] The road ahead and missed opportunities

[Andrea Pescetti]

Italo Vignoli wrote:
> I have seen mentions of these "23 roles" many times, but I have not seen 
> a list where they are described in detail. It looks like they have been 
> developed without even asking the SC members - or the group of the 
> founders - if this was the right approach.

Since nobody provides the link (the one Klaus-Jürgen sent was not
working for me... a problem at mail-archive.com, perhaps?), this is the
message that started the discussion about the "23 roles":
http://www.mail-archive.com/website@libreoffice.org/msg01680.html
Actually, a deputy SC member commented on that discussion.
The discussion might have later moved somewhere else, or to the wiki.

> I am very interested in understanding:
> 1. Why you decided to create "roles"... 
> 2. How you decided to define these "roles"
> 3. How you got to the number of "23 roles"...
> 4. Which benefits bring these 23 roles to the web site...
> I think that once these five questions (maybe silly ones, as I said) get 
> an answer and are fully understood by the community ... then 
> we might have a better understanding of the beauties and the advantages 
> of a different (and improved) web site).

Maybe the five (four?) questions are generated by a misunderstanding.
You'll see that "Roles" in that context referred to the meaning it has
in Drupal, i.e., just "Categories of website users", where a user can
belong to more than one category.

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: What's the official policy about the LibO website: Drupal or no Drupal?

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 16/12/2010 Marc Paré wrote:
> We are also fortunate with having as TDF/LO member and Drupal 
> members, Andrea Pascetti

Well, technically TDF/LO does not have members yet as far as I know; I'm
active in mailing lists and that's it. I know this is what you meant by
"member", sorry but I feel the need to clarify it before people are
confused!

> The Drupal team offers [...] 
> an alternative to the Silverstripe solution to be ready within the next 
> 6 months. As per the discussion at the Oct. 27th meeting (see voice 
> recording here: 
> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Steering_Committee_Meetings#Minutes_2010-10-27
>  
> as the written notes are not that complete

Good point, I remember listening to the actual recording too, at the
time, and I confirm notes are not 100% accurate: the decision was more
along the lines of "SilverStripe is the SC choice, and the chosen CMS
for the time being; this decision may be reconsidered in future". So the
eventual migration to Drupal cannot be taken for granted, even though I
don't expect the SC to veto it if it proves to be a better alternative.

Best regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org
List archive: http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

RE: [libreoffice-website] What's the official policy about the LibO website: Drupal or no Drupal?

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 15/12/2010 Narayan Aras wrote:
> Oracle Open Office offers update.
> Their marketing brochure actually boasts of large savings based on
> this single difference.
> So why does LibO not talk about "online updates" as a development goal
> at all??
> Also, since Oracle OO also is open source, adopting that part of
> design/code would be possible, right?

No, it wouldn't. Your question was going beyond the topic in discussion,
but pay attention to the differences between Oracle Open Office and
OpenOffice.org:
- Oracle Open Office is proprietary software and offers incremental
  updates.
- OpenOffice.org is free and open source software and does not offer
  incremental updates.

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org
List archive: http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [libreoffice-website] What's the official policy about the LibO website: Drupal or no Drupal?

[Andrea Pescetti]

Sophie Gautier wrote:
> We are a very very large 
> community and hence have very different needs, QA, l10, docs come at the 
> topf of my mind. Our community is not new, it comes with a past of work 
> and usage.

I agree with this. The OpenOffice.org volunteers now employ dozens of
tools, see slide 7 of
http://www.ooocon.org/index.php/ooocon/2010/paper/view/207 for a list of
20 or so tools/technologies in use, often with overlapping or identical
scope. Forcing a new technology on volunteers (even if it is by far the
best technology from a technical point of view) is always risky unless
you accept that you can do without those volunteers who simply do not
want to abandon the old, bad tools they got used to.

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org
List archive: http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [libreoffice-website] Download-Selector Script - Feedback wanted

[Andrea Pescetti]

Christian Lohmaier wrote:
> "gather-the-downloads" script via an iframe to the site and rather
> have a solution that can be cached in future, I added the
> functionality to silverstripe itself.
> http://pumbaa.ooodev.org:7780/home/download-and-sub/

Nice! Whatever the implementation, it's very good to address the
shortcoming of the OpenOffice.org infrastructure where the website is
not aware of what files are actually available for download and just
guesses.

I would maybe include a "See all available downloads and torrents" link
to allow a user to browse the archive in case of need.

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org
List archive: http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [libreoffice-website] For those who want to work on the CSS / code / missing translations on the CMS

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 13/11/2010 Christian Lohmaier wrote:
> the css and related files as well as the silverstripe code and related
> files have been uploaded to git and can be accessed/downloaded from
> github

Thanks! Is it (at least theoretically) possible to do something similar
with the actual site content? We had a brief exchange about this back in
October, but we didn't come to a clear conclusion.

> I created a snapshot of fr.test.libreoffice.org for offline use:
> https://website.test.libreoffice.org/assets/website/export/frhtml.tar.gz

So I see that making a snapshot is possible, and this is already quite
good; I would just like to know whether there is a way (it doesn't have
to be graphical) to track individual changes to the pages, like
http://it.openoffice.org/source/browse/it/www/download/3.2.1/download321.html?r1=1.11&r2=1.12

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org
List archive: http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [libreoffice-website] Language list on the homepage

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 07/11/2010 Stefan Weigel wrote:
> Am 07.11.2010 17:21, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
> 
> > A usability issue I see in http://test.libreoffice.org/
> 
> You are invited to improve it. Have you already got your access as a
> publisher to the CMS?

Of course I had registered and completed my profile before writing in
mailing list, but I'm not planning to edit pages in the immediate future
so I don't need further permissions.

I was merely submitting, as a casual visitor of the website, the
following idea for comments:

> > How can this be improved? I believe that the language selector on
> > http://www.openoffice.org/ is nice and unobtrusive, but then it shows a
> > rather unfriendly list when clicked. Would it be possible/desirable to
> > have a nice small selector that, when users move the mouse on it, shows
> > the available languages in an overlay?

But I see the test site has already changed and features a full list at
http://test.libreoffice.org/international/ which I find OK for the time
being; thanks to those who worked on it!

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: [tdf-discuss] FreeDesktop Bugzilla

[Andrea Pescetti]

Sebastian Spaeth wrote:
> I don't know if and how easy this would be in drupal. So far I have
> coded a very simple webform in "django" (python is my thing :-)) to
> allow uploading a document and a comment.

This would be elementary in Drupal.

> The only thing that is then left, is to link the uploaded doc to a
> bugzilla issue and display the status from the bug in question. The
> linking to a bug would (in my vision), not necessarily happen by the
> user, but by QA team, that vets those entries.

And this triaging phase is indeed the main challenge, both in technical
and in resources (volunteers) terms.

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] Modules for Documentation Framework

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 03/11/2010 Carlos Jenkins wrote:
> 2010/11/3 Benjamin Horst
> > I suppose we're looking at Drupal 6 for the site, but is there a chance
> > Drupal 7 and updated modules will be ready in time for us to use it from the
> > beginning?
> >
> Not sure, it's a possibility we need to analyse. If chosen, Drupal 7 will
> help us to prolong the life frame of the website framework. I'm actually
> worried that when Drupal 7 comes out, all modules we need doesn't have a
> version for Drupal 7

Since the pressing time constraints are over, I would definitely settle
on Drupal 7. Key modules will be ready the same day Drupal 7 is released
(that happens "when it's ready", but there are only a handful of
stoppers still open and I'd be surprised if the actual release is more
than some weeks away), others will follow soon and for the remaining
ones we can lobby or just help in the D7 port.

Drupal 7, besides the advantage Carlos outlined (longer timespan before
infrastructure upgrade), will have usability improvements (very
important in this case, since most editors will be new to Drupal),
better scalability (traffic will be high on this site) and flexibility
in the backend choice; for developers, it will allow a significantly
better distributed workflow.

Of course everything can now be tested on Drupal 6 as you are already
doing (and if I had to deliver a finished Drupal project within 2011 I'd
surely still build it in D6), but when Drupal 7 enters the Release
Candidate phase I'd be in favor of migrating to Drupal 7. It will have
to be done anyway, so better to do it early.

Also note that doing the project in D7 can give some experienced D6
developers the needed motivation to help (they would be experimenting
with D7 anyway, and this project would be time well spent for them,
while they might not be very keen to donate time for yet another D6
project).

Regards,
  Andrea Pescetti.


-- 
E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

[libreoffice-website] Language list on the homepage

[Andrea Pescetti]

A usability issue I see in http://test.libreoffice.org/ (but that of
course does not depend on the chosen CMS) is the language list on the
left hand side. This is rather important since one of the key strengths
of OpenOffice.org inherited by LibreOffice is its availability in about
100 languages.

Flaws I see in the current implementation include:
- Only a small subset of languages is presented on the home page, while
  they should have equal dignity to be "politically correct".
- The list appearing under "All languages" (besides badly needing some
  styling: http://test.libreoffice.org/home/all-languages/ is not very
  nice but this will obviously improve) uses the English names of
  languages, while the home page uses the local names.
- The list is too obtrusive to appear on the English site. I mean,
  http://www.wikipedia.org/ is only a language list, but then the
  English content lives at http://en.wikipedia.org and it has a separate
  home page. The LibreOffice site has English content on the "www"
  domain and must thus mix "English" and "international" features, but
  the "international" features should not be dominant, like this
  language list.

How can this be improved? I believe that the language selector on
http://www.openoffice.org/ is nice and unobtrusive, but then it shows a
rather unfriendly list when clicked. Would it be possible/desirable to
have a nice small selector that, when users move the mouse on it, shows
the available languages in an overlay?

Regards,
  Andrea Pescetti.


-- 
E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] ConfCall wiki page broken?

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 04/11/2010 Florian Effenberger wrote:
> believe me - we *NEED* a WYSIWYG editor, if we want large contributions 
> to the wiki (which we do). ;)

Large in what sense? A large number of contributors or a few
contributors making a large amount of work each?

I would say that in the first case the many contributors can live with
the standard editor (after all, paragraphs and basic lists are trivial,
and for a small contribution you probably won't need more), and in the
second one the contributors will be motivated enough to learn some
syntax and only "power users" facing problems like the one Christoph
mentioned (adding a column to a table) will have to endure some
annoyances.

In general I'm against WYSIWYG editors in MediaWiki also because they
often mangle code enough to make the "diff" function useless. But if you
know for sure that there are people who won't live without a WYSIWYG
editor, then I can't oppose it too much. I would, however, make it
disabled by default but then (since only knowledgeable people will know
where to find the option otherwise!) add a prominent "To enable
easy[/rich?] editing capabilities, click here" notice just above the
editing textarea.

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] Documentation framework for LibreOffice?

[Andrea Pescetti]

Andreas Mantke wrote:
If we want to use a CMS, we had to decide, if we want to use Plone, which some of the 
documentation-contributors already know, or another CMS (Drupal, Alfresco etc.)


I never used the OOoAuthors structures intensively, but recently the 
Italian OpenOffice.org documentation team expressed their desire to see 
the infrastructure upgraded to Plone 4, for performance reasons. So they 
they were thinking of a "vertical" Plone to Plone migration rather than 
a complete migration, and I think the same would apply to documentation 
for LibreOffice.


Regards,
  Andrea.

--
E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] CMS decision: Silverstripe

[Andrea Pescetti]

Florian Effenberger wrote:
during our yesterday's call, the CMS decision was taken: it will be 
Silverstripe as a starter, with plans to migrate to Drupal later on.


I haven't seen details, but this seems a sensible decision. This will 
give us the time to prepare a compelling Drupal infrastructure. Anyone 
available to discuss this at the next DrupalCon in Chicago 
http://chicago2011.drupal.org/ maybe?


...and then if the Steering Committee decides not to migrate we will 
just fork again! (I'm joking, of course).


Regards,
  Andrea Pescetti.

--
E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] [SC] Decision about CMS - Prototype or demo?

[Andrea Pescetti]

Benjamin Horst wrote:
> we'd need to set up a separate demo site on someone else's hosting
> account, because no one else has access to the filesystem on his
> webserver.

And, for those not knowing Drupal, access to the filesystem is a
prerequisite for installing modules, something I probably should have
mentioned as a further explanation in my latest message
http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/msg00537.html

This bottleneck could also explain why people on the list often stopped
short of actually installing modules on the demo: the admin password is
not enough, you need filesystem access in order to install modules.

This is not to criticize Keith's efforts or to justify the lack of a
proper Drupal demo: take it just as a technical clarification.

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] [SC] Decision about CMS

[Andrea Pescetti]

Christian Lohmaier wrote:
> Hi Rimas,
> 
> On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 9:26 AM, Rimas Kudelis  wrote:
> > 2010.10.23 03:26, Christian Lohmaier rašė:
> >> [...]
> >> And when the target-page's name is change, the links are not updated,
> >> but just happen to work because of the redirect/duplication that is
> >> added. ...
> > Two seconds of googling, two minutes of reading, and you can have it:
> > http://drupal.org/node/61829
> Ok, there is a path-filter module that allows URLs like
> "internal:node/". Now how would you tell the actual users how to
> insert those links?

I believe Rimas was referring to the more user-friendly solution listed
below what you mentioned, i.e., to http://drupal.org/project/linkit (see
screenshot there).

Shell/FTP access would be needed to install it on the demo, but for the
time being the screenshot should make it clear that this functionality
is covered.

Regards,
  Andrea.


--
E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] [SC] Decision about CMS

[Andrea Pescetti]

Drew Jensen wrote:
> So - proposal - if no agreement is coming then a vote?
> Either that or let the SC choose as I read the minutes.

I don't think the Document Foundation community is ready for a
democratic vote. Probably every move and decision taken so far has been
taken by the Steering Committee, and I can accept that this oligarchy
stays in place until the moment when we have projects and some
democratic procedures set up.

When they say the "website list" should decide, they have probably in
mind some kind of "website project" with minimal structure, that hasn't
happened yet. Or they just thought it would have been easy to reach
consensus.

> At Oo.o I served as an observer for a few Community Council elections

But then a vote was needed according to the procedures. Here I could
just bring some dozen Drupal fanatics to the list and win the poll
(Christian, I'm not saying you couldn't find an equal number of
Silverstripe fanatics!). But this would simply not be the right thing
for the Document Foundation site.

> Andrea, Ben, Keith offer to build out the Drupal solution.

My contribution would be more in planning than in actually building, as
I specified.

> What do you think?

As bad as it can be, the Document Foundation is still an oligarchy. Let
the SC choose. Then if people believe a simple majority vote is best we
can go that way, but I'm not sure times are ready for this.

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] [SC] Decision about CMS

[Andrea Pescetti]

Marc Paré wrote:
> So, there are 2 things to consider:
> 1. Does the SC wish #1 [AP: translatable pages] or the #2 [AP: subsites] 
> option?
> 2. Can either Silverstripe and Drupal support either of these scenarios.
> 
> Opinions on #2 is the one that is really important for this thread.
> 
> Could the Drupal and Silverstripe give us their opinion on this? Could 
> this scenario be supported by either package?

Yes, but this had already been discussed and demonstrated in both Drupal
and Silverstripe. However, the (SC's or whoever rules here) choice on
the first question will affect configuration.

Regards,
  Andrea.


--
E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] [SC] Decision about CMS

[Andrea Pescetti]

Benjamin Horst wrote:
> I am also available for Drupal support, and Jim Benstead (a friend of
> mine) volunteered to help earlier in the thread too.

If Drupal is chosen, I can help by:
- studying an overall infrastructure for a Drupal-based network of sites
with a nice, modern flow of information among them;
- donating (through my company) trainings and training materials about
code-driven, distributed development in Drupal to those involved in the
day-to-day website management.

Both tasks are Drupal specific, so I won't be able to do the same with
other CMSs. As for a more regular commitment, like most people I'll have
to see how the Document Foundation evolves prior to commit time to it on
a regular basis. So far I can only promise help in the startup phase, as
described above.

(Marc, no need to repost this, unless you believe it's useful to have
yet another summary already).

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] [SC] Decision about CMS

[Andrea Pescetti]

Christian Lohmaier wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> > If the Document Foundation must choose a tool that will be
> > flexible enough to rebuild all the current OpenOffice.org infrastructure
> > on it
> 
> No. I strongly disagree. Not one tool that can do all.

Well, for the Web part I still believe that a consistent user interface
would be a big advantage. You perfectly know that N-L leads often work
on their N-L website, software localization (Pootle), QA (TCM, QATrack)
and the more we can consolidate on one technology (not the same system!
but systems with the same technology) the better for them.

> And even that: Duplicating the extensions site would be a waste of
> time and efforts. There are already two repositories, the OOo one, the
> FSF one. It would be bad if there would be another one, just for the
> sake of having it.

I'm not saying this, and actually I'd better not say what I think about
making a new extensions repository. But the Steering Committee
blacklisted the OOo extensions site on day 1 (the release notes stated
that references to the OOo extensions site were a mistake) and committed
to using the FSF repository. Which obviously is sub-par: it's enough to
open http://extensions.libreoffice.org/ to see it. The quote by RMS in
http://documentfoundation.org/supporters seems to make it clear that
LibreOffice will use an alternative repository (i.e., the "FSF
repository", not a new one).

> > the Silverstripe demo (and of course Drupal too) seems to
> > support translation of the single pages: but is that what you want?
> 
> Well, this is a reiteration of what has been discussed already. No, it
> is not *all* that we want. That's why I did put the subsites

I honestly believe it is impossible to have both translatable pages and
subsites; it just doesn't make sense. Even though technically we can do
both, I'm quite against translatable pages unless there is a reason for
that. I envision a user experience where, based on browser preferences,
the user is just served http://it.documentfoundation.org instead of
http://www.documentfoundation.org by default if he uses an Italian
browser. Put aside the fact that both systems support them, how do you
see translatable page as an advantage here?

By the way, an important requirement is of course the ability to use the
CMS in your own language: from http://translate.silverstripe.org/ I see
that German and Slovak are the only OOo languages with a > 90%
translated interface, while in Drupal this is true of most widespread
languages.

(I agree with Ben about the other items, so I won't repeat his answers).

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] [SC] Decision about CMS

[Andrea Pescetti]

Sophie Gautier wrote:
> Just to point that we need to handle i18n and l10n easily also, this
> is important to think this multilanguage way till the beginning.

Then I'll have to ask again what you mean by this!

1) Having translatable pages (meaning: an English about page at
http://www.documentfoundation.org/about.html and its French translation
at http://www.documentfoundation.org/about.fr.html or equivalent)

2) Having localized websites, with independent structure but same login
(similar to how CollabNet is working now for OpenOffice.org)

3) Having both (not acceptable from my point of view, too confusing)

Work on a multilingual site cannot start before deciding on this.

Everybody who's been around for a few years in OpenOffice.org knows pros
and cons, but to summarize them:
- Option 1 makes it easier to monitor page changes, since you have the
"English version" and the "French version" of a page linked in the
system, and you can compare them easily.
- Option 2 gives N-L teams more flexibility, since they decide how to
structure their own site (from the diversity between N-L sites, I'd say
this is rather appreciated now). So if the French team wants an About
page, it will create it in their site structure; though, checking if it
is up-to-date with respect to  the English version must be done
manually.
- Option 3 to me is just problematic, since you don't know where to put
the French "About" page: in the global site as translation of the
English "About" or in the French site?

If I had to maintain the Italian section of the site, I would go for
Option 2: Italian pages would be the ones the Italian community feels
relevant for them, which can be different or in a different order than
the global (English?) ones.

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] [SC] Decision about CMS

[Andrea Pescetti]

Marc Paré wrote:
> I have re-read all of the posts and thus far: ... 
> Have I missed any? Please add points to this list that have come to a 
> resolution of debate among the contributors of this thread.

I have re-read all of them too, not only your summary, and I still see
we have strategic choices to make.

1) We shouldn't be discussing on a website, but on something more
remarkable. Not in terms of features (I agree in keeping out mailing
lists and stuff that is not web-related), but as seeing this as a huge
opportunity for creating a nice, remarkable, network of websites. And,
if the Document Fondation has a future, it will need this: it already
does, just open http://extensions.libreoffice.org 

A proper discussion would not fit the deadlines and tools the Document
Foundation has now: if a decision has to be taken now, it will miss the
bigger scope. If the Document Foundation must choose a tool that will be
flexible enough to rebuild all the current OpenOffice.org infrastructure
on it (e.g.: OOo site; Extensions; TCM; QATrack), then Drupal is that
tool; I can't imagine how to rebuild the Extensions site and all
processing in Silverstripe, for one. So the whole idea of "choosing a
tool just for the site" is short-sighted; build it on any technology,
but it will come the time when a really powerful tool has to be chosen
to give the community a unified user experience across all different
sites, and Drupal can hardly have rivals here.

2) Moving to a database-based CMS can imply loss of traceability of
changes. The current CVS infrastructure, as bad as it can be, allows to
see a full log of changes very easily. Drupal has a killer feature here:
site settings can be exported to PHP code, shared among a distributed
development team through any revision control system (SVN, git,
whatever) and applied in a safe way to the running site. It is very
important that we are able to answer the question "Who enabled
this permission, when and why?" easily and reliably, and the Drupal
Features module does this: it automatically monitors site settings and
exports them, so answering this question is just a matter of reading the
changelog. I didn't see anything like this in Silverstripe; is it there?

3) How do you plan to implement translations? (from a visitor's point
of view, not technically). I mean, the current http://www.openoffice.org
site is in English only; you need to go to http://de.openoffice.org to
see content in German, but that one is a totally different site. On the
other hand, the Silverstripe demo (and of course Drupal too) seems to
support translation of the single pages: but is that what you want? From
what I could see (pumbaa has been down for me for the last two hours)
you also foresee N-L subsites. A choice must be made between:
- Having translatable pages
- Having localized websites, with independent structure but same login
- Having both (not acceptable from my point of view, too confusing)

These kinds of decisions are much more important than a demo in my
opinion: then, I understand that on this and other important matters the
Steering Committee is in a hurry and it needs things done quickly rather
than properly. I just fear, and my arguments are above, that choosing
the "nice out of the box" Silverstripe will hinder further
development... Unless there is the attitude to rediscuss this in a few
months, like the "Codebase migration from CVS" discussion, that was
resolved by temporarily migrating to SVN as a quick decision with the
promise (then fulfilled) to migrate to a distributed SCM after one year.

Best regards,
  Andrea Pescetti.


--
E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] CMS requirements / suitability testing

[Andrea Pescetti]

efault "book" module which provides 
you with a 9-level page hierarchy.



Those are the basic requirements that come to my mind


Well, Drupal has another killer feature if you consider the structure of 
the OOo community: with the Code-Driven Development techniques, you can 
collaborate remotely and work together on a site at the same time. For 
most CMSs this is impossible because settings (like, how many items 
should be displayed in the "latest news" block in the homepage; or what 
additional modules are installed) are stored in the database, and this 
forbids to have separate development sandboxes and merging them cleanly. 
With Code-Driven Development, you export all your settings to PHP code 
automatically, merging is clean and safe and versioning is effective 
again: you can browse the SVN/GIT/mercurial history and see what 
settings were changed and when. This way you also solve the major 
drawback in database-based CMSs, i.e., tracking changes that are 
normally buried in database. I guess this is the reason why the OOo 
Templates/Extensions site is managed by a single developer: cooperation 
would be very hard on that old (Drupal 5) infrastructure.



I'd be happy if someone else could do this for drupal or whatever
other CMS you think should be in the closer choice.


Got it! Yes, I understand there are only words above, and you would like 
to see a concrete, dedicated, demo site. Based on my experience in the 
OOo community, I would totally go for a code-driven approach because 
this is the crucial advantage Drupal 6 offers on other database-based 
CMSs; I haven't seen Keith's initial setup, but if it follows this 
approach I'll happily have a look. Otherwise... OK, tell me if there is 
still interest in a Drupal demo and willingness for a fair assessment 
and we'll see.


Best regards,
  Andrea Pescetti.

--
E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] improved the mailing list archives

[Andrea Pescetti]

Florian Effenberger wrote:
> Andrea Pescetti wrote on 2010-10-15 21.28:
> > Is there the possibility to add the message date too in the message
> > lists like http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website ? ...
> 
> should work now ;)

Thanks, it is much more convenient this way!

Regards,
  Andrea.


-- 
E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [libreoffice-website] improved the mailing list archives

[Andrea Pescetti]

Florian Effenberger wrote:
> I just improved the mailing list archives a little bit. They look nicer, 
> and line wrapping should work much better.

They are much nicer indeed, thanks!

Is there the possibility to add the message date too in the message
lists like http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website ? I had to look for
messages in the archives a few times and I would have found very helpful
to have dates somewhere on the list.

Regards,
  Andrea Pescetti.


-- 
E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted