Hi All Just following up on this again as would like to get the Service Providers page tidied up. Looking at the links Emmanuel sent, I think that the column with committer names needs to removed, and I would also probably remove the number contributors column too.
One thing to bear in mind is that I don't think this list changes very much, so I would try to keep the information at a level that doesn't need a lot of maintenance. My suggestion would be to keep it as 3 columns, name, location(s) and contact. Location can be wherever the company has a physical presence (so includes employees located there). The contact would be a website or an email, and any other links eg social media would go. Please let me know if this would be an acceptable solution for everyone. Thanks Sharan On 2016-08-05 00:54 (+0200), Scott Gray <scott.g...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote: > > > > Further more the columns 'number of committers/contributors' and > > 'Contributors' provide an unfair advantage to those with committers and > > more than 1 contributor. > > > > An advantage? Perhaps. Unfair? I'm not so sure about that. > > Pros: > If it does convey an advantage then perhaps that might encourage companies > to contribute more which is good for the project both in terms of diversity > and contributions. > > Cons: > What does it mean to be a contributor? If I create a single JIRA ticket > for some minor thing can I then be considered a contributor for the rest of > eternity? If not, then we have to define some rules and I hate the idea of > adding pointless rules. For this reason I don't like the idea of including > a count, but definitely not because of any perception of unfairness. > > The same applies with to service providers with > > more than one location. > > > > This I disagree with, it is not unfair to state the locations where the > company employees work from. I think that's information that the page > users would find useful, and if it is important to them then attempting to > figure out that information by following tens or hundreds of links isn't > very useful. To claim it is an advantage is in itself an admittance that > the information would be found useful, is it not? It's very > straightforward factual information and unlike 'number of contributors' it > doesn't require any rules or definitions and isn't open to interpretation. > > Regards > Scott > > > On 4 August 2016 at 07:52, Pierre Smits <pierre.sm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I believe the link to the site of Antweb (ofbiz.info) adds little value, > > as > > the list can be sorted on location. > > > > Further more the columns 'number of committers/contributors' and > > 'Contributors' provide an unfair advantage to those with committers and > > more than 1 contributor. The same applies with to service providers with > > more than one location. As I mentioned earlier, let the service providers > > do their marketing on their own site. Referencing blog sites, social media > > accounts, email addresses, etc falls into that category. > > > > A link to the primary website of the service provider should be enough, > > resulting in following columns in the table: > > > > - name > > - Country, Province/Region/State > > - website. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Pierre Smits > > > > ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> > > OFBiz based solutions & services > > > > OFBiz Extensions Marketplace > > http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ > > > > On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Jacques Le Roux < > > jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote: > > > > > Thanks for the effort Sharan! > > > > > > I'd wait a bit that people have a look. I just had a glance but did not > > > review all yet. > > > > > > for instance, I'm fine with http://www.ofbiz.info/control/providers but > > I > > > wonder if it follows the rules because I also did not read yet > > > http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/linking#productsupport > > > > > > Jacques > > > > > > > > > > > > Le 03/08/2016 à 14:21, Sharan Foga a écrit : > > > > > >> Hi All > > >> > > >> I have done an initial review of the service provider page and removed > > >> any of the links that are broken, no longer working or where the webpage > > >> has nothing to do with OFBiz. If I know that it is OFBiz related (even > > >> though I couldnt find it on the website, I have left it in the list). > > There > > >> are a few Chinese ones that I will need some help in de-coding :-) > > >> > > >> I think this list built up to a big size was because it was previously > > >> open and people just came in and created an entry and link to their > > >> website, even if it had absolutely nothing to do with OFBiz. Now with > > >> having to be a contributor to edit the wiki, I hope this will prevent > > this > > >> type of thing happening in the future. > > >> > > >> It is sorted alphabetically and I've removed the description column. I > > >> will take a look at the link Emmanuel has provided. Should I continue > > with > > >> the tidy up based on what has been talked about so far or should I wait > > to > > >> see if this needs to be discussed some more? > > >> > > >> Thanks > > >> Sharan > > >> > > >> > > >> On 2016-08-03 09:43 (+0200), "Sharan Foga"<sharan.f...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > >> > > >>> I will start to implement some of these changes discussed here so if > > >>> anyone else wants to join in and help, then please feel free. > > >>> > > >>> Thanks > > >>> Sharan > > >>> > > >>> On 2016-08-02 16:06 (+0200), Jacopo Cappellato < > > >>> jacopo.cappell...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> While we wait for the new site we could: > > >>>> > > >>>> 0) add the page discalimer as suggested; additionally, as Jacques > > >>>> pointed > > >>>> out, this page is open to anyone who submits an ICLA and asks to be > > >>>> registered as OFBiz contributor: no one is really reviewing the data > > >>>> provided... we could mention this in the header of the page > > >>>> 1) merge the two lists into one > > >>>> 2) sort in alphabetical order > > >>>> 3) add a column with the number of committers; one with the number of > > >>>> contributors; we could add also a column with the number of employees > > >>>> working on OFBiz related projects; I don't think that this data would > > >>>> "unduly > > >>>> advantage one commercial entity": the idea is to provide some insight > > >>>> about > > >>>> the teams available to work on OFBiz specific projects > > >>>> 4) make the above columns sortable > > >>>> 5) Location: simply specify the location of the company's > > >>>> offices/buildings; in the description the company can specify the > > >>>> countries > > >>>> of operation > > >>>> > > >>>> Jacopo > > >>>> > > >>>> On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny < > > >>>> elecha...@gmail.com> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> Hi ! > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> it came to my attention that this page : > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/ > > Apache+OFBiz+Service+Providers > > >>>>> > > >>>>> might not be neutral enough, as it lists companies having Ofbiz > > >>>>> committers before any other companies. This is a problem, accordingly > > >>>>> to > > >>>>> this : > > >>>>> > > >>>>> "Apache is a 501(c)(3) non-profit, which is a tax-exempt charity for > > >>>>> the > > >>>>> public > > >>>>> good. As such, our projects must not unduly advantage one commercial > > >>>>> entity > > >>>>> over another -- otherwise, funding our projects would be a way to > > fund > > >>>>> a > > >>>>> commercial activity without being taxed." > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> You can also have a look at > > >>>>> http://community.apache.org/projectIndependence : > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> " > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Apache projects are managed independently > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Apache projects must be managed independently, and PMCs must ensure > > >>>>> that > > >>>>> they are acting in the best interests of the project as a whole. Note > > >>>>> that it is similarly important that the PMC clearly show this > > >>>>> independence within their project community. The perception of > > existing > > >>>>> and new participants within the community that the PMC is run > > >>>>> independently and without favoring any specific third parties over > > >>>>> others is important, to allow new contributors to feel comfortable > > both > > >>>>> joining the community and contributing their work. A community that > > >>>>> obviously favors one specific vendor in some exclusive way will often > > >>>>> discourage new contributors from competing vendors, which is an issue > > >>>>> for the long term health of the project. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> " > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I would suggest you rework this page to order the company using an > > >>>>> alphabetical order, not mentionning the fact taht some committers > > >>>>> belong > > >>>>> to those companies. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I'm not sure that grouping companies by country is the right thing to > > >>>>> do, as some of them might provide support in many countries. One > > option > > >>>>> would be to add the list of countries a company provides support in > > on > > >>>>> the same line. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> A disclaimer at the top of the page may also be added, informing > > users > > >>>>> that > > >>>>> neither Apache nor the project endorse any company. You can have a > > look > > >>>>> at other project's page : > > >>>>> > > >>>>> http://cxf.apache.org/commercial-cxf-offerings.html > > >>>>> > > >>>>> http://directory.apache.org/commercial-support.html > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Thanks ! > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Emmanuel Lécharny > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > > > > >
