Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
47 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

Keith N. McKenna
I should probably have my head examined but I am thinking of one more
time trying to revive the documentation effort for AOO. One of the
drawbacks is that most people that have started to help have left as
there has been very limited availability of mentoring. I do not see this
changing but I am hoping that by defining a new process we can reduce
the dependency on mentoring.

One idea for this would require that the MediaWiki extension be made
functional again. This would allow for using Writer to create the source
which could be stored in the git repository and then be transferred to
the mwiki for easy online access. By storing the source in the
repository it would give us better revision control over the
documentation. Plus it may help relieve the mentoring problem as many
more people are familiar with using Writer.

Another would be to use Docbook, though this is not as appealing as I
have no familiarity with it and it appears that there is a steep
learning curve to its use and that would be a disadvantage to attracting
new people.

I look forward to any other suggestions that could move this effort
along as it has languished for far to long.

Regards
Keith


signature.asc (499 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

Dave Fisher-2
Keith,

I pledge to support you however I can.

I’ve been thinking about www.openoffice.org

What do you think about using markdown?

Regards,
Dave

Sent from my iPhone

> On May 30, 2020, at 5:42 PM, Keith N. McKenna <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I should probably have my head examined but I am thinking of one more
> time trying to revive the documentation effort for AOO. One of the
> drawbacks is that most people that have started to help have left as
> there has been very limited availability of mentoring. I do not see this
> changing but I am hoping that by defining a new process we can reduce
> the dependency on mentoring.
>
> One idea for this would require that the MediaWiki extension be made
> functional again. This would allow for using Writer to create the source
> which could be stored in the git repository and then be transferred to
> the mwiki for easy online access. By storing the source in the
> repository it would give us better revision control over the
> documentation. Plus it may help relieve the mentoring problem as many
> more people are familiar with using Writer.
>
> Another would be to use Docbook, though this is not as appealing as I
> have no familiarity with it and it appears that there is a steep
> learning curve to its use and that would be a disadvantage to attracting
> new people.
>
> I look forward to any other suggestions that could move this effort
> along as it has languished for far to long.
>
> Regards
> Keith
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

Marcus (OOo)
Am 31.05.20 um 02:46 schrieb Dave Fisher:
> I’ve been thinking about www.openoffice.org
>
> What do you think about using markdown?

we are using on some webpages quite intensive Javascript. Is markdown
able to handle this?

In general, I don't see the need to use markdown more widely in the
website. At least I don't know how this could improve the documentation
area.

Marcus



>> On May 30, 2020, at 5:42 PM, Keith N. McKenna <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> I should probably have my head examined but I am thinking of one more
>> time trying to revive the documentation effort for AOO. One of the
>> drawbacks is that most people that have started to help have left as
>> there has been very limited availability of mentoring. I do not see this
>> changing but I am hoping that by defining a new process we can reduce
>> the dependency on mentoring.
>>
>> One idea for this would require that the MediaWiki extension be made
>> functional again. This would allow for using Writer to create the source
>> which could be stored in the git repository and then be transferred to
>> the mwiki for easy online access. By storing the source in the
>> repository it would give us better revision control over the
>> documentation. Plus it may help relieve the mentoring problem as many
>> more people are familiar with using Writer.
>>
>> Another would be to use Docbook, though this is not as appealing as I
>> have no familiarity with it and it appears that there is a steep
>> learning curve to its use and that would be a disadvantage to attracting
>> new people.
>>
>> I look forward to any other suggestions that could move this effort
>> along as it has languished for far to long.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

Carl Marcum-5
In reply to this post by Keith N. McKenna
Hi Keith,

On 5/30/20 8:41 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:

> I should probably have my head examined but I am thinking of one more
> time trying to revive the documentation effort for AOO. One of the
> drawbacks is that most people that have started to help have left as
> there has been very limited availability of mentoring. I do not see this
> changing but I am hoping that by defining a new process we can reduce
> the dependency on mentoring.
>
> One idea for this would require that the MediaWiki extension be made
> functional again. This would allow for using Writer to create the source
> which could be stored in the git repository and then be transferred to
> the mwiki for easy online access. By storing the source in the
> repository it would give us better revision control over the
> documentation. Plus it may help relieve the mentoring problem as many
> more people are familiar with using Writer.

Is this extension a different one that the IDL tag extension that is
causing the
problem with the dev guides?

>
> Another would be to use Docbook, though this is not as appealing as I
> have no familiarity with it and it appears that there is a steep
> learning curve to its use and that would be a disadvantage to attracting
> new people.
>
> I look forward to any other suggestions that could move this effort
> along as it has languished for far to long.
>
> Regards
> Keith
>
Thanks,
Carl

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

Matthias Seidel
Hi Carl,

Am 31.05.20 um 13:38 schrieb Carl Marcum:

> Hi Keith,
>
> On 5/30/20 8:41 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>> I should probably have my head examined but I am thinking of one more
>> time trying to revive the documentation effort for AOO. One of the
>> drawbacks is that most people that have started to help have left as
>> there has been very limited availability of mentoring. I do not see this
>> changing but I am hoping that by defining a new process we can reduce
>> the dependency on mentoring.
>>
>> One idea for this would require that the MediaWiki extension be made
>> functional again. This would allow for using Writer to create the source
>> which could be stored in the git repository and then be transferred to
>> the mwiki for easy online access. By storing the source in the
>> repository it would give us better revision control over the
>> documentation. Plus it may help relieve the mentoring problem as many
>> more people are familiar with using Writer.
>
> Is this extension a different one that the IDL tag extension that is
> causing the
> problem with the dev guides?
Keith is talking about the Wiki publisher extension from AOO.
Although we build it with every release it has not been functional for a
long time...

You are probably thinking of the Wiki extension for our Wiki server.

Two different things, but both must be fixed. ;-)

Regards,

   Matthias

>
>>
>> Another would be to use Docbook, though this is not as appealing as I
>> have no familiarity with it and it appears that there is a steep
>> learning curve to its use and that would be a disadvantage to attracting
>> new people.
>>
>> I look forward to any other suggestions that could move this effort
>> along as it has languished for far to long.
>>
>> Regards
>> Keith
>>
> Thanks,
> Carl
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


smime.p7s (5K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

Keith N. McKenna
In reply to this post by Carl Marcum-5
On 5/31/2020 7:38 AM, Carl Marcum wrote:

> Hi Keith,
>
> On 5/30/20 8:41 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>> I should probably have my head examined but I am thinking of one more
>> time trying to revive the documentation effort for AOO. One of the
>> drawbacks is that most people that have started to help have left as
>> there has been very limited availability of mentoring. I do not see this
>> changing but I am hoping that by defining a new process we can reduce
>> the dependency on mentoring.
>>
>> One idea for this would require that the MediaWiki extension be made
>> functional again. This would allow for using Writer to create the source
>> which could be stored in the git repository and then be transferred to
>> the mwiki for easy online access. By storing the source in the
>> repository it would give us better revision control over the
>> documentation. Plus it may help relieve the mentoring problem as many
>> more people are familiar with using Writer.
>
> Is this extension a different one that the IDL tag extension that is
> causing the
> problem with the dev guides?
>
H1 Carl

Yes it is a different one. The Media Wiki extension was used to convert
an ODT document to mwiki format and move it to the mwiki.

Regards
Keith
<snip>
> Thanks,
> Carl



signature.asc (499 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

Peter Kovacs-3
In reply to this post by Keith N. McKenna

Am 31.05.20 um 02:41 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:

> Another would be to use Docbook, though this is not as appealing as I
> have no familiarity with it and it appears that there is a steep
> learning curve to its use and that would be a disadvantage to attracting
> new people.

The SUSE documenters use(d) Docbook to create multiple targets for
documentation.

They presented their way on FOSDEM in 2017, for LO. It was very
interesting. But I dont know if they stick to it, because LO shifted all
documentation into the web.

And created a Platform similar to pootle. (I never looked at it, just
what I picked up from my FOSDEM visits)

>
> I look forward to any other suggestions that could move this effort
> along as it has languished for far to long.

IMHO the first step is to create a plan. Dividing the plan into work
packages that can be promoted is important.

Because all people who expressed interest expected they are told what
needs to be done where. They did not felt

comfortable to figure that out on their own.

Also socializing seems to be important. The volunteers do not want to
work "alone". They want to be part of something.

How it is done, did not seem so important to me on first spot.


I just want to point out, since I had multiple discussions now. ProOOBox
(Jörg care to share some details?) is working on a documentation update.

Integrating them would be very nice from my stand point.


That is my experience from Recruiting and AOO ComDev efforts I have been
involved in.


HTH

Peter


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

Keith N. McKenna
In reply to this post by Dave Fisher-2
On 5/30/2020 8:46 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:

> Keith,
>
> I pledge to support you however I can.
>
> I’ve been thinking about www.openoffice.org
>
> What do you think about using markdown?
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> Sent from my iPhone
I appreciate the pledge of support Dave. I am leery of using markdown
for the same reasons I expressed about Docbook; IE. the learning curve.
I lean towards using AOO Writer as most people that volunteer are
familiar with Writer and there are more people that can mentor people in
the use of it. Another is is the use of templates to create a uniform
look and feel, plus it reinforces the the brand image of AOO by using
our own product to create professional looking documents.

A potential use for markdown would be as another method of distributing
the documentation by use of a converter to generate the markdown files
for adding them to the Website but as we already have much of the
documentation on the wiki this would need to be discussed further.

Regards
Keith

>
>> On May 30, 2020, at 5:42 PM, Keith N. McKenna <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> I should probably have my head examined but I am thinking of one more
>> time trying to revive the documentation effort for AOO. One of the
>> drawbacks is that most people that have started to help have left as
>> there has been very limited availability of mentoring. I do not see this
>> changing but I am hoping that by defining a new process we can reduce
>> the dependency on mentoring.
>>
>> One idea for this would require that the MediaWiki extension be made
>> functional again. This would allow for using Writer to create the source
>> which could be stored in the git repository and then be transferred to
>> the mwiki for easy online access. By storing the source in the
>> repository it would give us better revision control over the
>> documentation. Plus it may help relieve the mentoring problem as many
>> more people are familiar with using Writer.
>>
>> Another would be to use Docbook, though this is not as appealing as I
>> have no familiarity with it and it appears that there is a steep
>> learning curve to its use and that would be a disadvantage to attracting
>> new people.
>>
>> I look forward to any other suggestions that could move this effort
>> along as it has languished for far to long.
>>
>> Regards
>> Keith
>>


signature.asc (499 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

Keith N. McKenna
In reply to this post by Peter Kovacs-3
On 5/31/2020 10:41 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:

>
> Am 31.05.20 um 02:41 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>
>> Another would be to use Docbook, though this is not as appealing as I
>> have no familiarity with it and it appears that there is a steep
>> learning curve to its use and that would be a disadvantage to attracting
>> new people.
>
> The SUSE documenters use(d) Docbook to create multiple targets for
> documentation.
I like the idea of DocBook and since AOO will create the version 4.1.2
DTD for the XML structure the learning curve for a volunteer is greatly
reduced. The learning curve would be myself and hopefully others in
learning how to generate the different formats for distribution.
>
> They presented their way on FOSDEM in 2017, for LO. It was very
> interesting. But I dont know if they stick to it, because LO shifted all
> documentation into the web.
>
> And created a Platform similar to pootle. (I never looked at it, just
> what I picked up from my FOSDEM visits)

From What I can see from a cursory inspection of there documentation
pages they have taken over the old ODF Authors site At least that is
where the link in the old documentation from ODF Authors redirects to.

>
>>
>> I look forward to any other suggestions that could move this effort
>> along as it has languished for far to long.
>
> IMHO the first step is to create a plan. Dividing the plan into work
> packages that can be promoted is important.
>
> Because all people who expressed interest expected they are told what
> needs to be done where. They did not felt
>
> comfortable to figure that out on their own.
Unfortunately that is not going to change a whole lot. Just as the
development effort is self directed so is the Documentation effort and
all volunteers are advised of that. One the the ultimate goals I have in
mind is to re-invigorate doc@ as the place for all things related to
documentation to help create the the community that will be necessary..

>
> Also socializing seems to be important. The volunteers do not want to
> work "alone". They want to be part of something.
>
> How it is done, did not seem so important to me on first spot.
>
>
> I just want to point out, since I had multiple discussions now. ProOOBox
> (Jörg care to share some details?) is working on a documentation update.
>
> Integrating them would be very nice from my stand point.
Yes it would be, but could take a large translation effort if the
Documentation they produce is not currently in English
>
>
> That is my experience from Recruiting and AOO ComDev efforts I have been
> involved in.
>
>
> HTH
>
> Peter



signature.asc (499 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

Peter Kovacs-3

Am 01.06.20 um 17:57 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:

> On 5/31/2020 10:41 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>> Also socializing seems to be important. The volunteers do not want to
>> work "alone". They want to be part of something.
>>
>> How it is done, did not seem so important to me on first spot.
>>
>>
>> I just want to point out, since I had multiple discussions now. ProOOBox
>> (Jörg care to share some details?) is working on a documentation update.
>>
>> Integrating them would be very nice from my stand point.
> Yes it would be, but could take a large translation effort if the
> Documentation they produce is not currently in English
I understood that the work is done on an english version too. But I am
not sure.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

F Campos Costero
In reply to this post by Keith N. McKenna
I am not sure that this part of the process has to remain as it is.
> Unfortunately that is not going to change a whole lot. Just as the
> development effort is self directed so is the Documentation effort and
> all volunteers are advised of that.

If we can increase participation in the documentation work by having
someone to assign tasks to others, that seems like a reasonable change to
make. I am willing to take on coordinating the assignments if others can
help create a reasonable list of tasks. To be clear, if someone wants to be
self directed, that would be great. If someone feels more comfortable being
given a task, having a specific person to contact for help and perhaps
having a little checking in on progress, I can do that. I have no training
in technical writing. I took a quick look at DocBook and it does not seem
conceptually difficult, so I can try to learn that. If someone can give me
a little help at first, I would appreciate it.

If you are wondering who I am, I have been a moderator on the user forum
for about 10 years.

Francis

On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 9:58 AM Keith N. McKenna <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> On 5/31/2020 10:41 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
> >
> > Am 31.05.20 um 02:41 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
> >
> >> Another would be to use Docbook, though this is not as appealing as I
> >> have no familiarity with it and it appears that there is a steep
> >> learning curve to its use and that would be a disadvantage to attracting
> >> new people.
> >
> > The SUSE documenters use(d) Docbook to create multiple targets for
> > documentation.
>
> I like the idea of DocBook and since AOO will create the version 4.1.2
> DTD for the XML structure the learning curve for a volunteer is greatly
> reduced. The learning curve would be myself and hopefully others in
> learning how to generate the different formats for distribution.
> >
> > They presented their way on FOSDEM in 2017, for LO. It was very
> > interesting. But I dont know if they stick to it, because LO shifted all
> > documentation into the web.
> >
> > And created a Platform similar to pootle. (I never looked at it, just
> > what I picked up from my FOSDEM visits)
>
> From What I can see from a cursory inspection of there documentation
> pages they have taken over the old ODF Authors site At least that is
> where the link in the old documentation from ODF Authors redirects to.
> >
> >>
> >> I look forward to any other suggestions that could move this effort
> >> along as it has languished for far to long.
> >
> > IMHO the first step is to create a plan. Dividing the plan into work
> > packages that can be promoted is important.
> >
> > Because all people who expressed interest expected they are told what
> > needs to be done where. They did not felt
> >
> > comfortable to figure that out on their own.
>
> Unfortunately that is not going to change a whole lot. Just as the
> development effort is self directed so is the Documentation effort and
> all volunteers are advised of that. One the the ultimate goals I have in
> mind is to re-invigorate doc@ as the place for all things related to
> documentation to help create the the community that will be necessary..
> >
> > Also socializing seems to be important. The volunteers do not want to
> > work "alone". They want to be part of something.
> >
> > How it is done, did not seem so important to me on first spot.
> >
> >
> > I just want to point out, since I had multiple discussions now. ProOOBox
> > (Jörg care to share some details?) is working on a documentation update.
> >
> > Integrating them would be very nice from my stand point.
>
> Yes it would be, but could take a large translation effort if the
> Documentation they produce is not currently in English
> >
> >
> > That is my experience from Recruiting and AOO ComDev efforts I have been
> > involved in.
> >
> >
> > HTH
> >
> > Peter
>
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

Peter Kovacs-3
Hi all,

Am 02.06.20 um 00:23 schrieb F Campos Costero:

> I am not sure that this part of the process has to remain as it is.
>> Unfortunately that is not going to change a whole lot. Just as the
>> development effort is self directed so is the Documentation effort and
>> all volunteers are advised of that.
> If we can increase participation in the documentation work by having
> someone to assign tasks to others, that seems like a reasonable change to
> make. I am willing to take on coordinating the assignments if others can
> help create a reasonable list of tasks. To be clear, if someone wants to be
> self directed, that would be great. If someone feels more comfortable being
> given a task, having a specific person to contact for help and perhaps
> having a little checking in on progress, I can do that. I have no training
> in technical writing. I took a quick look at DocBook and it does not seem
> conceptually difficult, so I can try to learn that. If someone can give me
> a little help at first, I would appreciate it.

I think there is a miss understanding. I do not believe that we should

actively assign tasks and boss people around.

Think of it as a suggestive list of where someone could do something.

How it is organized, is not important.

It could be a list on ta wikies discussion side. It can be a tasklist on
Jira, Bugzilla or mwiki, or cwiki.

The Idea is to have "one" place where people can inform them selfs on
the existing consent.

Just some Ideas where I tried to describe what we have to do in the
development section:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/RapidBoard.jspa?rapidView=301&projectKey=OPENOFFICE&selectedIssue=OPENOFFICE-76

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Improvement

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=67633711

As you see it is unordered. And I am experimenting a lot. And I am
moving between Jira and Cwiki.

But I am becoming better in being able to explain people what Issues do
we have where. And what could be an easier task to do and what is more
difficult.

But I really believe that we should leave the choice what people do to them.


And If you look around what I do is not new. MWiki is full of pages
where people describe what we should do and how. (That is the most
depressing part on the project, because it is all gobe, and give people
a tomb feeling.

But at the same time you learn so much from their Ideas. If we can
standardize somehow these Ideas, and remove names. I think it would
lower the barrier in getting involved.


If you feel this is the right way, I invite you to figure a way. If you
want anything to be done on Jira, just give me a shout. I will create a
document component, and create a kanban board for you. No Problem.

But you can also use whatever else we have, at our disposal.

> If you are wondering who I am, I have been a moderator on the user forum
> for about 10 years.
That is really nice. There is so little exchange between the dev mailing
list and the support team.


All the best


Peter


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

F Campos Costero
Peter - I regret that my suggestion came across as wanting to "boss people
around". I was responding really to this comment earlier in the thread
> Because all people who expressed interest expected they are told what
> needs to be done where. They did not felt
>
> comfortable to figure that out on their own.

All I meant was that a solution could be to provide such people with
concrete suggestions of what to do first. Of course that can take into
account their interests, skill level and available time. I am sure lists of
possible contributions can be helpful for them to make a decision and it
would make sense to start with that. But the success rate of recruiting
using the self-directed approach has been very low. I do not understand why
providing the option for more guidance to those who want it is so
objectionable.  I  expect that many people joining a project feel lost and
would appreciate getting more direction at first. It would be natural for
them to become more independent after making a contribution or two.

I hope Keith will express his opinion on this.

Francis

On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 5:42 PM Peter Kovacs <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Am 02.06.20 um 00:23 schrieb F Campos Costero:
> > I am not sure that this part of the process has to remain as it is.
> >> Unfortunately that is not going to change a whole lot. Just as the
> >> development effort is self directed so is the Documentation effort and
> >> all volunteers are advised of that.
> > If we can increase participation in the documentation work by having
> > someone to assign tasks to others, that seems like a reasonable change to
> > make. I am willing to take on coordinating the assignments if others can
> > help create a reasonable list of tasks. To be clear, if someone wants to
> be
> > self directed, that would be great. If someone feels more comfortable
> being
> > given a task, having a specific person to contact for help and perhaps
> > having a little checking in on progress, I can do that. I have no
> training
> > in technical writing. I took a quick look at DocBook and it does not seem
> > conceptually difficult, so I can try to learn that. If someone can give
> me
> > a little help at first, I would appreciate it.
>
> I think there is a miss understanding. I do not believe that we should
>
> actively assign tasks and boss people around.
>
> Think of it as a suggestive list of where someone could do something.
>
> How it is organized, is not important.
>
> It could be a list on ta wikies discussion side. It can be a tasklist on
> Jira, Bugzilla or mwiki, or cwiki.
>
> The Idea is to have "one" place where people can inform them selfs on
> the existing consent.
>
> Just some Ideas where I tried to describe what we have to do in the
> development section:
>
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/RapidBoard.jspa?rapidView=301&projectKey=OPENOFFICE&selectedIssue=OPENOFFICE-76
>
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Improvement
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=67633711
>
> As you see it is unordered. And I am experimenting a lot. And I am
> moving between Jira and Cwiki.
>
> But I am becoming better in being able to explain people what Issues do
> we have where. And what could be an easier task to do and what is more
> difficult.
>
> But I really believe that we should leave the choice what people do to
> them.
>
>
> And If you look around what I do is not new. MWiki is full of pages
> where people describe what we should do and how. (That is the most
> depressing part on the project, because it is all gobe, and give people
> a tomb feeling.
>
> But at the same time you learn so much from their Ideas. If we can
> standardize somehow these Ideas, and remove names. I think it would
> lower the barrier in getting involved.
>
>
> If you feel this is the right way, I invite you to figure a way. If you
> want anything to be done on Jira, just give me a shout. I will create a
> document component, and create a kanban board for you. No Problem.
>
> But you can also use whatever else we have, at our disposal.
>
> > If you are wondering who I am, I have been a moderator on the user forum
> > for about 10 years.
> That is really nice. There is so little exchange between the dev mailing
> list and the support team.
>
>
> All the best
>
>
> Peter
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

Pedro Lino-3
Hi Peter, all

> On June 2, 2020 3:51 AM F Campos Costero <[hidden email]> wrote:

> All I meant was that a solution could be to provide such people with
> concrete suggestions of what to do first. Of course that can take into
> account their interests, skill level and available time. I am sure lists of
> possible contributions can be helpful for them to make a decision and it
> would make sense to start with that. But the success rate of recruiting
> using the self-directed approach has been very low. I do not understand why
> providing the option for more guidance to those who want it is so
> objectionable.  I  expect that many people joining a project feel lost and
> would appreciate getting more direction at first. It would be natural for
> them to become more independent after making a contribution or two.

+1
I agree with Francis. Giving people directions is a positive way to help them start.

This does not affect their freedom and is useful for the project and for the volunteers.
Telling people "you can do anything" but not giving examples or pointers IS demotivating for many people.
Other people who prefer to dig in and not take any suggestions are free to do so!

If Francis is volunteering to create lists of entry points I think he should be supported and appreciated!

Just my 2 cents.

Regards,
Pedro

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

Peter Kovacs-3
In reply to this post by F Campos Costero
Hi Francis,

Hi Keith,

Am 02.06.20 um 04:51 schrieb F Campos Costero:
> Peter - I regret that my suggestion came across as wanting to "boss people
> around". I was responding really to this comment earlier in the thread

Imho you have nothing to regret. In a conversation there are at least 2
people involved.

And it is very difficult to get a common understanding between people
who are

unknown to each other. Lets be stisfied that we have the same understanding.


Please take my apologies for my poor wording. I should have come up with
a better

approach to confirm or create consent. I have overshoot my goal.

>> Because all people who expressed interest expected they are told what
>> needs to be done where. They did not felt
>>
>> comfortable to figure that out on their own.
> All I meant was that a solution could be to provide such people with
> concrete suggestions of what to do first. Of course that can take into
> account their interests, skill level and available time. I am sure lists of
> possible contributions can be helpful for them to make a decision and it
> would make sense to start with that. But the success rate of recruiting
> using the self-directed approach has been very low. I do not understand why
> providing the option for more guidance to those who want it is so
> objectionable.  I  expect that many people joining a project feel lost and
> would appreciate getting more direction at first. It would be natural for
> them to become more independent after making a contribution or two.
>
> I hope Keith will express his opinion on this.

Yes, I am also interested. Keith you still have concerns of sorts?

Or other comment. I whish to hear that too.


Of course anyone else is invited to participate!

All the best

Peter


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

Keith N. McKenna
In reply to this post by F Campos Costero
On 6/1/2020 6:23 PM, F Campos Costero wrote:

> I am not sure that this part of the process has to remain as it is.
>> Unfortunately that is not going to change a whole lot. Just as the
>> development effort is self directed so is the Documentation effort and
>> all volunteers are advised of that.
>
> If we can increase participation in the documentation work by having
> someone to assign tasks to others, that seems like a reasonable change to
> make. I am willing to take on coordinating the assignments if others can
> help create a reasonable list of tasks. To be clear, if someone wants to be
> self directed, that would be great. If someone feels more comfortable being
> given a task, having a specific person to contact for help and perhaps
> having a little checking in on progress, I can do that. I have no training
> in technical writing. I took a quick look at DocBook and it does not seem
> conceptually difficult, so I can try to learn that. If someone can give me
> a little help at first, I would appreciate it.
>
> If you are wondering who I am, I have been a moderator on the user forum
> for about 10 years.
>
> Francis
Greetings Francis;

I am familiar with you through your posts both here and on the old OOo
lists as well. I welcome your offer to help with this. Hopefully with
two of us able to be available for help and mentoring the community for
documentation can grow.

I have been looking a little closer at DocBook as well and I believe it
could be a way to open up more avenues of distribution. AOO does output
to DocBook format through the save as option so that part of the
learning curve is eliminated for the volunteers. I believe there is also
a Media Wiki extension for DocBook so that we can still output to the
mwiki as well as to PDF and Epub and possibly others.

Regards
Keith
<snip>


signature.asc (499 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

Keith N. McKenna
In reply to this post by F Campos Costero
On 6/1/2020 10:51 PM, F Campos Costero wrote:

> Peter - I regret that my suggestion came across as wanting to "boss people
> around". I was responding really to this comment earlier in the thread
>> Because all people who expressed interest expected they are told what
>> needs to be done where. They did not felt
>>
>> comfortable to figure that out on their own.
>
> All I meant was that a solution could be to provide such people with
> concrete suggestions of what to do first. Of course that can take into
> account their interests, skill level and available time. I am sure lists of
> possible contributions can be helpful for them to make a decision and it
> would make sense to start with that. But the success rate of recruiting
> using the self-directed approach has been very low. I do not understand why
> providing the option for more guidance to those who want it is so
> objectionable.  I  expect that many people joining a project feel lost and
> would appreciate getting more direction at first. It would be natural for
> them to become more independent after making a contribution or two.
>
> I hope Keith will express his opinion on this.
>
I am fully in agreement with you on this not being a boss/worker
hierarchical approach but more of one of mentoring and guiding
volunteers into the "Apache Way." How that gets done is more of an
implementation detail that can be worked out and will most likely remain
a work in progress as new volunteers come forward.

Regards
Keith

> Francis
>
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 5:42 PM Peter Kovacs <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Am 02.06.20 um 00:23 schrieb F Campos Costero:
>>> I am not sure that this part of the process has to remain as it is.
>>>> Unfortunately that is not going to change a whole lot. Just as the
>>>> development effort is self directed so is the Documentation effort and
>>>> all volunteers are advised of that.
>>> If we can increase participation in the documentation work by having
>>> someone to assign tasks to others, that seems like a reasonable change to
>>> make. I am willing to take on coordinating the assignments if others can
>>> help create a reasonable list of tasks. To be clear, if someone wants to
>> be
>>> self directed, that would be great. If someone feels more comfortable
>> being
>>> given a task, having a specific person to contact for help and perhaps
>>> having a little checking in on progress, I can do that. I have no
>> training
>>> in technical writing. I took a quick look at DocBook and it does not seem
>>> conceptually difficult, so I can try to learn that. If someone can give
>> me
>>> a little help at first, I would appreciate it.
>>
>> I think there is a miss understanding. I do not believe that we should
>>
>> actively assign tasks and boss people around.
>>
>> Think of it as a suggestive list of where someone could do something.
>>
>> How it is organized, is not important.
>>
>> It could be a list on ta wikies discussion side. It can be a tasklist on
>> Jira, Bugzilla or mwiki, or cwiki.
>>
>> The Idea is to have "one" place where people can inform them selfs on
>> the existing consent.
>>
>> Just some Ideas where I tried to describe what we have to do in the
>> development section:
>>
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/RapidBoard.jspa?rapidView=301&projectKey=OPENOFFICE&selectedIssue=OPENOFFICE-76
>>
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Improvement
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=67633711
>>
>> As you see it is unordered. And I am experimenting a lot. And I am
>> moving between Jira and Cwiki.
>>
>> But I am becoming better in being able to explain people what Issues do
>> we have where. And what could be an easier task to do and what is more
>> difficult.
>>
>> But I really believe that we should leave the choice what people do to
>> them.
>>
>>
>> And If you look around what I do is not new. MWiki is full of pages
>> where people describe what we should do and how. (That is the most
>> depressing part on the project, because it is all gobe, and give people
>> a tomb feeling.
>>
>> But at the same time you learn so much from their Ideas. If we can
>> standardize somehow these Ideas, and remove names. I think it would
>> lower the barrier in getting involved.
>>
>>
>> If you feel this is the right way, I invite you to figure a way. If you
>> want anything to be done on Jira, just give me a shout. I will create a
>> document component, and create a kanban board for you. No Problem.
>>
>> But you can also use whatever else we have, at our disposal.
>>
>>> If you are wondering who I am, I have been a moderator on the user forum
>>> for about 10 years.
>> That is really nice. There is so little exchange between the dev mailing
>> list and the support team.
>>
>>
>> All the best
>>
>>
>> Peter
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>
>>


signature.asc (499 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

F Campos Costero
Thanks to everyone for the feedback. I will start to look at how to make
actual documents from the DocBook output of Writer and I will see what I
can figure out about the documentation process. I am certainly experiencing
the feeling of being lost on a new project. I did subscribe to the doc mail
list and that might be the place for further discussions about how to get
the documentation work active again.
Francis

On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 10:40 AM Keith N. McKenna <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> On 6/1/2020 10:51 PM, F Campos Costero wrote:
> > Peter - I regret that my suggestion came across as wanting to "boss
> people
> > around". I was responding really to this comment earlier in the thread
> >> Because all people who expressed interest expected they are told what
> >> needs to be done where. They did not felt
> >>
> >> comfortable to figure that out on their own.
> >
> > All I meant was that a solution could be to provide such people with
> > concrete suggestions of what to do first. Of course that can take into
> > account their interests, skill level and available time. I am sure lists
> of
> > possible contributions can be helpful for them to make a decision and it
> > would make sense to start with that. But the success rate of recruiting
> > using the self-directed approach has been very low. I do not understand
> why
> > providing the option for more guidance to those who want it is so
> > objectionable.  I  expect that many people joining a project feel lost
> and
> > would appreciate getting more direction at first. It would be natural for
> > them to become more independent after making a contribution or two.
> >
> > I hope Keith will express his opinion on this.
> >
> I am fully in agreement with you on this not being a boss/worker
> hierarchical approach but more of one of mentoring and guiding
> volunteers into the "Apache Way." How that gets done is more of an
> implementation detail that can be worked out and will most likely remain
> a work in progress as new volunteers come forward.
>
> Regards
> Keith
>
> > Francis
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 5:42 PM Peter Kovacs <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> Am 02.06.20 um 00:23 schrieb F Campos Costero:
> >>> I am not sure that this part of the process has to remain as it is.
> >>>> Unfortunately that is not going to change a whole lot. Just as the
> >>>> development effort is self directed so is the Documentation effort and
> >>>> all volunteers are advised of that.
> >>> If we can increase participation in the documentation work by having
> >>> someone to assign tasks to others, that seems like a reasonable change
> to
> >>> make. I am willing to take on coordinating the assignments if others
> can
> >>> help create a reasonable list of tasks. To be clear, if someone wants
> to
> >> be
> >>> self directed, that would be great. If someone feels more comfortable
> >> being
> >>> given a task, having a specific person to contact for help and perhaps
> >>> having a little checking in on progress, I can do that. I have no
> >> training
> >>> in technical writing. I took a quick look at DocBook and it does not
> seem
> >>> conceptually difficult, so I can try to learn that. If someone can give
> >> me
> >>> a little help at first, I would appreciate it.
> >>
> >> I think there is a miss understanding. I do not believe that we should
> >>
> >> actively assign tasks and boss people around.
> >>
> >> Think of it as a suggestive list of where someone could do something.
> >>
> >> How it is organized, is not important.
> >>
> >> It could be a list on ta wikies discussion side. It can be a tasklist on
> >> Jira, Bugzilla or mwiki, or cwiki.
> >>
> >> The Idea is to have "one" place where people can inform them selfs on
> >> the existing consent.
> >>
> >> Just some Ideas where I tried to describe what we have to do in the
> >> development section:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/RapidBoard.jspa?rapidView=301&projectKey=OPENOFFICE&selectedIssue=OPENOFFICE-76
> >>
> >>
> >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Improvement
> >>
> >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=67633711
> >>
> >> As you see it is unordered. And I am experimenting a lot. And I am
> >> moving between Jira and Cwiki.
> >>
> >> But I am becoming better in being able to explain people what Issues do
> >> we have where. And what could be an easier task to do and what is more
> >> difficult.
> >>
> >> But I really believe that we should leave the choice what people do to
> >> them.
> >>
> >>
> >> And If you look around what I do is not new. MWiki is full of pages
> >> where people describe what we should do and how. (That is the most
> >> depressing part on the project, because it is all gobe, and give people
> >> a tomb feeling.
> >>
> >> But at the same time you learn so much from their Ideas. If we can
> >> standardize somehow these Ideas, and remove names. I think it would
> >> lower the barrier in getting involved.
> >>
> >>
> >> If you feel this is the right way, I invite you to figure a way. If you
> >> want anything to be done on Jira, just give me a shout. I will create a
> >> document component, and create a kanban board for you. No Problem.
> >>
> >> But you can also use whatever else we have, at our disposal.
> >>
> >>> If you are wondering who I am, I have been a moderator on the user
> forum
> >>> for about 10 years.
> >> That is really nice. There is so little exchange between the dev mailing
> >> list and the support team.
> >>
> >>
> >> All the best
> >>
> >>
> >> Peter
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >>
> >>
>
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

Rory O'Farrell
On Tue, 2 Jun 2020 14:14:28 -0600
F Campos Costero <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Thanks to everyone for the feedback. I will start to look at how to make
> actual documents from the DocBook output of Writer and I will see what I
> can figure out about the documentation process. I am certainly experiencing
> the feeling of being lost on a new project. I did subscribe to the doc mail
> list and that might be the place for further discussions about how to get
> the documentation work active again.
> Francis


A useful start might be to look at some of the Tutorials on en-Forum; they often give quite detailed methods of achieving OpenOffice operations for many of its applications.

Rory


>
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 10:40 AM Keith N. McKenna <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > On 6/1/2020 10:51 PM, F Campos Costero wrote:
> > > Peter - I regret that my suggestion came across as wanting to "boss
> > people
> > > around". I was responding really to this comment earlier in the thread
> > >> Because all people who expressed interest expected they are told what
> > >> needs to be done where. They did not felt
> > >>
> > >> comfortable to figure that out on their own.
> > >
> > > All I meant was that a solution could be to provide such people with
> > > concrete suggestions of what to do first. Of course that can take into
> > > account their interests, skill level and available time. I am sure lists
> > of
> > > possible contributions can be helpful for them to make a decision and it
> > > would make sense to start with that. But the success rate of recruiting
> > > using the self-directed approach has been very low. I do not understand
> > why
> > > providing the option for more guidance to those who want it is so
> > > objectionable.  I  expect that many people joining a project feel lost
> > and
> > > would appreciate getting more direction at first. It would be natural for
> > > them to become more independent after making a contribution or two.
> > >
> > > I hope Keith will express his opinion on this.
> > >
> > I am fully in agreement with you on this not being a boss/worker
> > hierarchical approach but more of one of mentoring and guiding
> > volunteers into the "Apache Way." How that gets done is more of an
> > implementation detail that can be worked out and will most likely remain
> > a work in progress as new volunteers come forward.
> >
> > Regards
> > Keith
> >
> > > Francis
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 5:42 PM Peter Kovacs <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi all,
> > >>
> > >> Am 02.06.20 um 00:23 schrieb F Campos Costero:
> > >>> I am not sure that this part of the process has to remain as it is.
> > >>>> Unfortunately that is not going to change a whole lot. Just as the
> > >>>> development effort is self directed so is the Documentation effort and
> > >>>> all volunteers are advised of that.
> > >>> If we can increase participation in the documentation work by having
> > >>> someone to assign tasks to others, that seems like a reasonable change
> > to
> > >>> make. I am willing to take on coordinating the assignments if others
> > can
> > >>> help create a reasonable list of tasks. To be clear, if someone wants
> > to
> > >> be
> > >>> self directed, that would be great. If someone feels more comfortable
> > >> being
> > >>> given a task, having a specific person to contact for help and perhaps
> > >>> having a little checking in on progress, I can do that. I have no
> > >> training
> > >>> in technical writing. I took a quick look at DocBook and it does not
> > seem
> > >>> conceptually difficult, so I can try to learn that. If someone can give
> > >> me
> > >>> a little help at first, I would appreciate it.
> > >>
> > >> I think there is a miss understanding. I do not believe that we should
> > >>
> > >> actively assign tasks and boss people around.
> > >>
> > >> Think of it as a suggestive list of where someone could do something.
> > >>
> > >> How it is organized, is not important.
> > >>
> > >> It could be a list on ta wikies discussion side. It can be a tasklist on
> > >> Jira, Bugzilla or mwiki, or cwiki.
> > >>
> > >> The Idea is to have "one" place where people can inform them selfs on
> > >> the existing consent.
> > >>
> > >> Just some Ideas where I tried to describe what we have to do in the
> > >> development section:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/RapidBoard.jspa?rapidView=301&projectKey=OPENOFFICE&selectedIssue=OPENOFFICE-76
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Improvement
> > >>
> > >>
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=67633711
> > >>
> > >> As you see it is unordered. And I am experimenting a lot. And I am
> > >> moving between Jira and Cwiki.
> > >>
> > >> But I am becoming better in being able to explain people what Issues do
> > >> we have where. And what could be an easier task to do and what is more
> > >> difficult.
> > >>
> > >> But I really believe that we should leave the choice what people do to
> > >> them.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> And If you look around what I do is not new. MWiki is full of pages
> > >> where people describe what we should do and how. (That is the most
> > >> depressing part on the project, because it is all gobe, and give people
> > >> a tomb feeling.
> > >>
> > >> But at the same time you learn so much from their Ideas. If we can
> > >> standardize somehow these Ideas, and remove names. I think it would
> > >> lower the barrier in getting involved.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> If you feel this is the right way, I invite you to figure a way. If you
> > >> want anything to be done on Jira, just give me a shout. I will create a
> > >> document component, and create a kanban board for you. No Problem.
> > >>
> > >> But you can also use whatever else we have, at our disposal.
> > >>
> > >>> If you are wondering who I am, I have been a moderator on the user
> > forum
> > >>> for about 10 years.
> > >> That is really nice. There is so little exchange between the dev mailing
> > >> list and the support team.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> All the best
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Peter
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> >
> >


--
Rory O'Farrell <[hidden email]>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

Peter Kovacs-3
In reply to this post by F Campos Costero
Hi all,


Here is the talk I mentioned earlier. It explains how SuSE is Publishing
Documentation (Which is in general), and what Tools they use.

https://archive.fosdem.org/2017/schedule/event/writing_open_source_documentation/

Hope it is inspiring on creating a new documentation process.


I am happy that we have consent on the general direction.

Great!

All the best

Peter

Am 02.06.20 um 22:14 schrieb F Campos Costero:

> Thanks to everyone for the feedback. I will start to look at how to make
> actual documents from the DocBook output of Writer and I will see what I
> can figure out about the documentation process. I am certainly experiencing
> the feeling of being lost on a new project. I did subscribe to the doc mail
> list and that might be the place for further discussions about how to get
> the documentation work active again.
> Francis
>
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 10:40 AM Keith N. McKenna <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> On 6/1/2020 10:51 PM, F Campos Costero wrote:
>>> Peter - I regret that my suggestion came across as wanting to "boss
>> people
>>> around". I was responding really to this comment earlier in the thread
>>>> Because all people who expressed interest expected they are told what
>>>> needs to be done where. They did not felt
>>>>
>>>> comfortable to figure that out on their own.
>>> All I meant was that a solution could be to provide such people with
>>> concrete suggestions of what to do first. Of course that can take into
>>> account their interests, skill level and available time. I am sure lists
>> of
>>> possible contributions can be helpful for them to make a decision and it
>>> would make sense to start with that. But the success rate of recruiting
>>> using the self-directed approach has been very low. I do not understand
>> why
>>> providing the option for more guidance to those who want it is so
>>> objectionable.  I  expect that many people joining a project feel lost
>> and
>>> would appreciate getting more direction at first. It would be natural for
>>> them to become more independent after making a contribution or two.
>>>
>>> I hope Keith will express his opinion on this.
>>>
>> I am fully in agreement with you on this not being a boss/worker
>> hierarchical approach but more of one of mentoring and guiding
>> volunteers into the "Apache Way." How that gets done is more of an
>> implementation detail that can be worked out and will most likely remain
>> a work in progress as new volunteers come forward.
>>
>> Regards
>> Keith
>>
>>> Francis
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 5:42 PM Peter Kovacs <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Am 02.06.20 um 00:23 schrieb F Campos Costero:
>>>>> I am not sure that this part of the process has to remain as it is.
>>>>>> Unfortunately that is not going to change a whole lot. Just as the
>>>>>> development effort is self directed so is the Documentation effort and
>>>>>> all volunteers are advised of that.
>>>>> If we can increase participation in the documentation work by having
>>>>> someone to assign tasks to others, that seems like a reasonable change
>> to
>>>>> make. I am willing to take on coordinating the assignments if others
>> can
>>>>> help create a reasonable list of tasks. To be clear, if someone wants
>> to
>>>> be
>>>>> self directed, that would be great. If someone feels more comfortable
>>>> being
>>>>> given a task, having a specific person to contact for help and perhaps
>>>>> having a little checking in on progress, I can do that. I have no
>>>> training
>>>>> in technical writing. I took a quick look at DocBook and it does not
>> seem
>>>>> conceptually difficult, so I can try to learn that. If someone can give
>>>> me
>>>>> a little help at first, I would appreciate it.
>>>> I think there is a miss understanding. I do not believe that we should
>>>>
>>>> actively assign tasks and boss people around.
>>>>
>>>> Think of it as a suggestive list of where someone could do something.
>>>>
>>>> How it is organized, is not important.
>>>>
>>>> It could be a list on ta wikies discussion side. It can be a tasklist on
>>>> Jira, Bugzilla or mwiki, or cwiki.
>>>>
>>>> The Idea is to have "one" place where people can inform them selfs on
>>>> the existing consent.
>>>>
>>>> Just some Ideas where I tried to describe what we have to do in the
>>>> development section:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/RapidBoard.jspa?rapidView=301&projectKey=OPENOFFICE&selectedIssue=OPENOFFICE-76
>>>>
>>>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Improvement
>>>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=67633711
>>>> As you see it is unordered. And I am experimenting a lot. And I am
>>>> moving between Jira and Cwiki.
>>>>
>>>> But I am becoming better in being able to explain people what Issues do
>>>> we have where. And what could be an easier task to do and what is more
>>>> difficult.
>>>>
>>>> But I really believe that we should leave the choice what people do to
>>>> them.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And If you look around what I do is not new. MWiki is full of pages
>>>> where people describe what we should do and how. (That is the most
>>>> depressing part on the project, because it is all gobe, and give people
>>>> a tomb feeling.
>>>>
>>>> But at the same time you learn so much from their Ideas. If we can
>>>> standardize somehow these Ideas, and remove names. I think it would
>>>> lower the barrier in getting involved.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you feel this is the right way, I invite you to figure a way. If you
>>>> want anything to be done on Jira, just give me a shout. I will create a
>>>> document component, and create a kanban board for you. No Problem.
>>>>
>>>> But you can also use whatever else we have, at our disposal.
>>>>
>>>>> If you are wondering who I am, I have been a moderator on the user
>> forum
>>>>> for about 10 years.
>>>> That is really nice. There is so little exchange between the dev mailing
>>>> list and the support team.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> All the best
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Peter
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

123