Hi Mike, all,
just a few points I want to mention...
They are my personal opinion, but having been part of the OOo community
for quite a number of years, I'm quite sure that they are shared by
other people too.
Michael Wheatland schrieb:
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 9:40 PM, Charles-H. Schulz
The admins have run this since the beginning and I don't see why we should
host our website elsewhere. Now the website team has some people with admin
rights and that's how it works. It's actually the usual way to operate
elsewhere. What wouldyou suggest?
I am not suggesting changing anything as long as the website team has
the autonomy and authority to modify and improve our areas of
The present website team consists of the people working on the website
and improving it.
Your activities have been a different main focus in the past, so it is
great to have you on board again.
When David presented his first iteration of the website, he had to face
some comments on different parts of his work. He tried to reply to quite
a number of postings here on the list, but he couldn't see a common
direction in the comments, so discussions led to nothing than more
As we urgently need the website and most of us think it has to be
improved sooner than later, David started a new iteration of the site.
He asked the SC for their approval to work on the site until the 10th of
January and he wanted to hand it over to the community at this time.
Probably because there have not been an active website team, but only a
few people commenting the now active website in different directions, he
asked the SC to be the responsible group to accept the website.
It was simply the suggestion that the Steering Committee would be kept
in the loop before the website team that seems disrespectful and
somewhat belittles the team.
You might see it different, but there is no active website team at the
moment except the few people working on the site.
The website team didn't manage to create content for the main site for
several weeks, so we have to doubt, if there is a team at all.
We will create the team in a few days, as I'm very sure that the SC will
accept the website created by David and Ivan who supports him at the
As this new version will contain address of our concerns for the present
website, the new website team will be able to work on improvements
I don't know if we need a formal "lead" as the LibO community tries to
avoid hierarchical structures. Decisions are based on merit instead:
People who have actively worked on a certain task have the most
important voice in decisions about this topic.
The website needs a group of people taking care of it's quality, because
this is the first and most prominent area where potential users and
contributors contact LibreOffice.
This group has to consist of specialists in webdesign, user experience,
marketing and documentation, and I'm quite sure that you will be a
relevant part of this group once you have shown your active contribution
to *this* area of work.
We will have a new active website team - let's start working after the 10th.
Hence, the progress that David has made privately should be shared
with the website team as a whole to allow review and future
contributions from the whole team.
It will be shared after the 10th (as I already mentioned above, the SC
will not refuse Davids and Ivan's great work).
Review and future contributions will be done by the new team - following
the recommendations of the experts mentioned above.
There are many people involved in this list who are keen to
contribute. Lets get them involved.
I truly hope so, even if the past did prove the opposite...
To do that, we need to be kept up to date with the Silverstripe site
progress and encourage collaboration, delegation and accountability.
Even if David is working on a sandbox site, his progress can be looked
at, as the link to the site has already been posted here on the list.
He's probably doing more work in the background, so the site is not at
the bleeding edge, but as he asked us to wait with comments three more
days, I don't think that this causes any problems.
(I don't repeat the link here - if you think it is important to have a
look at it *now*, you'll find it in the archives).
If we'll have an active team from the 10th on, the future workflow will
not only concentrate on improving the content, but in involving (new)
community contributors too.
PS: Please remember: My personal opinion only!
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
- Re: RE : Re: [libreoffice-website] Regroup and further development of the website(s) (continued)
- Re: [libreoffice-website] Regroup and further development of the website(s) · Bernhard Dippold
Impressum (Legal Info)
: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our trademark policy