Le 2011-01-06 21:05, Bernhard Dippold a écrit :
Hi Bernhard, thanks for your comments and opinions. I also leave my
opinions on this matter then, and I would not be surprised if others
will also leave their comments as well.
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.
Maybe some but not all people. The LibO community has grown with new
members, which is what the LibreOffice is also all about. Some of us
have no prior knowledge of problems with the OOo. Knowing/informed of
prior problems with OOo is great for insight, but new people may have
fresh ideas that they bring to the new LibreOffice group. This will add
vibrancy to the group and give it more of a "forward looking" view of
LibreOffice and its communities.
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
host our website elsewhere. Now the website team has some people with
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.
I beg to differ. There was a group of website members willing to help
out and had their names listed on the Silverstripe team wiki page
membership roster. Now, I can no longer seem to find the wiki page, you
only have to re-read the thread on the website discussion list titled:
"[libreoffice-website] [SC] Decision about CMS" to get a feeling of who
had volunteered/offered help with the site. Just in case you are too
busy to re-reread this voluminous thread, as I was the one who also
helped in organising the initial wiki page with the pro/cons of the
remaining contending CMS' as well as the section with the website
Silverstripe and Drupal teams (Christian had originally started the
page), you could either filter the thread on my last name "pare" to see
the development of the CMS member volunteer discussions or I have listed
the particular posts talking of offers of help here:
As you can see there were some members who had offered their help, some
of whom, very experienced in website building. Again, I had personally
worked on a section of the site adding content. It was only later that
David asked for a larger role in order to complete adding content. It
was at this point that we all stood back and agreed to unfettered
control to David so that he could complete this task (as agreed by the SC).
I myself was/am a little concerned that these situations should, at
best, be avoided in the future as it does not promote to the community
aspect to the project. We may risk losing capable members if they see
their role in the LibreOffice diminished this way. A community
involvement should always be the option for all parts of LibreOffice ...
is this not what we signed up for? But OK, the SC decided on this path
which will result in the CMS of Jan. 10th.
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.
I can only speak for myself on this point. We were assured that a
working website would be available in short after the SC had decided on
a Silverstripe CMS start. I assumed, naively, that there was a content
team ready to pour content into the site. I therefore spent time with
the Drupal team. It was only later that I realised there was no content
team for the international site (English) and that the German and French
teams had in fact added sufficiently amount of content themselves to go
live! At this point I jumped in and started helping out. Note that there
had already been calls for better guidance in the marketing confcall or
at least a list of tasks to be taken care of, but none was ever produced.
When there is no organisation, then there is no action and a loss of
collective contribution. There has to be better organised methods used
if we are to get anywhere. Proof that organising works is the recent
movement to organise all teams with a tasks list
(http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Marketing/Release) targetted to the
release(s) of LibO distro(s). We are all better equipped to work this
way. Many thanks to the person who organised this list of tasks.
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.
Perhaps then we should revisit this. There have already been discussions
on the documentation team of a documentation lead. Italo is our defacto
lead with the marketing team (we have ablsolutely no problem with this).
This seems to work quite well with these teams. Why would there not be
this kind of leadership role for the website team? As you state, this is
the "first and most prominent area" of LibreOffice.
We will have a new active website team - let's start working after the
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).
Here it is, in case anyone missed it: http://18.104.22.168:7780/ . This
is public knowledge for the website list and was given out by David
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!
My opinions as well.
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: [libreoffice-website] Regroup and further development of the website(s) · Bernhard Dippold
- Re: [libreoffice-website] Regroup and further development of the website(s) (continued)
- [libreoffice-website] Re: Regroup and further development of the website(s) · Marc Paré
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