[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       fe-web
Subject:    Re: status?
From:       Lynn Winebarger <owinebar () free-expression ! org>
Date:       2000-01-09 18:04:24
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sun, 9 Jan 2000, Sandra Fauconnier wrote:

> This is my first possible engagement with an open source project, so, same
> here, I don't have much of a clue of what a website for an initiatve
> like this should look like. As an occasional visitor to such a site I
> would spontaneously expect 

   I should have mentioned this in my previous message, but the sites I
was thinking of looking at (to distill what's useful and avoid what's not)
were www.gnome.org, www.mozilla.org, and www.sourceforge.net.  Those are
primarily developer sites, but I think they could give an idea of what
developers want in a site.  
   For example, each has (at least) bug tracking systems, a CVS code
browser, and a discussion system.  Source Forge has a feature request
forum, and mozilla has a "blame system" where you can track (on the web)
who's responsible for checking in code that's causing problems (called
bonsai).  Most of this web code is available as free software, so we can
use it in our own system.
   But, I think, those should be part of the area you get when you click
the "Developer" button (or however it's designed) not the main site
itself.

> 
> - a good amount of clear descriptions of what the project is about, the
> hows and whys; understandable by non-techies and techies; 
> - a status report (how far has the project evolved);  
> - download area, as soon as beta versions become available;  
> - area for support, documentation and contact info. 
> 
> This is the 'external PR' part and only a very basic framework which says
> nothing about 'how it should be done' (technically and aesthetically).  
> 
   What I think would be extremely helpful (aiding the first) would be a
little java app demonstrating the kind of environment we're trying to
develop, because it's actually more powerful than the other tools that
available now.  

> My own experience with visiting similar sites tells me that you
> might easily become too technical -- I know this is a sensitive issue
> among coders, but I think anyone will benefit from clear, well-written and
> 'educative' instructions and documentation. Also, many OS sites are too
> minimalistic, provide way too little of this kind of information.
> 
   Yeah, I think you and F11, and the writer I was talking about, probably
have a better idea of what should go in the user-oriented area than I do,
or at least what would be the most useful.  
   In particular, the writer's pretty good with explaining why we need the
project.  If you look at Linux Journal's older articles
(www.linuxjournal.com) under "currents", you'll see 2 that are directly
relevant, "Copyright Strikes Back" and "In Seattle's Aftermath".


> Next, I think this project might benefit from a more user-centered
> approach in the future (broadcasters who get the opportunity to
> self-promote through the site??). Occasional, interested visitors are a
> first category of people who will use this site; those who actually use
> the software (as soon as it's available) are an important second group and
> the site and project might benefit from being hospitable to these folks.
> If 'we' can handle it, that is.
> 
    I agree.

Lynn

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]