+1 on not spending a lot of time discussing the Scooby page specifically. With all the time that's been spent, someone could have implemented a reasonable page or pages. Probably not a page that would make every involved party completely happy, but that's a different story ... :)
-1 on cribbing existing elements from the chandler.osafoundation.org site. +1 on a coordinated branding effort so all the OSAF sites have coherence and a professional appearance. The following sites do a relatively good job of this in my opinion: http://www.mozilla.com/ http://www.rubyonrails.org/ http://www.mysql.com/ http://www.postgresql.org/ http://www.joomla.org/ -1 on children starving to death. +1 on a fairly simple, mostly text page for Scooby with organized sections and better organization than the wiki. -1 on pages that look like www.gnu.org. +1 on some sort of quickie graphical logo for Scooby -- even if it's just Arial Black with a tiny drop shadow behind it. I'll stay up late at night and throw one out myself if I have to do it. Matthew On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 09:28 -0800, Priscilla Chung wrote: > So it seems to me that there are two very distinct issues here. One is > about the content and the other is about aesthetics. From my > interpretation of the Fogel quotes, it speaks less about aesthetics as > about content, clear writing, and clear organization. I understand about > the ecosystem, and how it is important to have engaging, clearly written > documentation. In my opinion, for Scooby 0.1, the content is more > important than aesthetics. > > That said, from a PM's perspective of Scooby all that is needed on front > facing pages is > a link somewhere on the main OSAF page to Scooby (and Cosmo), instead of > being buried on the wiki. A Scooby centralized page that helps route > developers to the right parts of the wiki. > > The other point which is obvious but seems to be another project all > together is the organization of the wiki. And to touch on Brian's point, > everything already looks inconsistent: OSAF front page, the Chandler > launch page, and the wiki, all have different organizations, different > formating and different aesthetics. If we're serious about the branding > for OSAF and the ecosystem of products, we should start by choosing > common look for the OSAF front page, wiki and the project home pages. > > -Priscilla > > > Sheila Mooney wrote: > > Sorry if this is repetitive... > > > > + I really don't think there is any disagreement that we want to have > > something better than > > this....http://wiki.osafoundation.org/bin/view/Projects/ScoobyHome. > > > > + I also think there is agreement that we want to have some key pieces > > of content like links to the blog, mailing lists, how to get involved > > (whatever seems reasonable at this stage). I personally am not crazy > > about links to placeholder pages that say "in progress", but that's > > just my opinion. > > > > + Where we really disagree is giving the Scooby 0.1 landing page the > > same look and feel as the Chandler landing page to make it more like > > an "official" part of the ecosystem. To address one of Brian's > > replies, it's not that we think putting together a custom html page is > > beyond our capabilities over the next 2 weeks. Mimi is simply pointing > > out that it's not as simple as Pieter just using the Chandler page, > > adding the content and tweaking a few things. Matt and others will > > have to do SOME work. When we decided in mid-Jan to just package up > > whatever "Scooby" we had by a certain date, test it for a day and put > > it out there, the PPD team just assumed we would go with something > > sufficient but low key as a landing page. Low key certainly doesn't > > imply crappy or that we wouldn't follow most of the principles > > described by Fogel. Since the Scooby releases are expected to be more > > frequent, we could plan for a more full scale landing page in 0.2. > > > > For all the time I have spent over the past 2 weeks on this, it might > > have been better spent working on the larger branding effort we need > > to tackle for all our products including the "ecosystem". I don't > > think that when we designed the Chandler 0.6 landing page we were > > thinking of the look and feel for all the products, the ecosystem or > > how we want Chandler 1.0 to look. For me, one take-away here is that > > perhaps it would be a good idea to start thinking about this sooner > > rather than later. > > > > Just my 2 cents. > > > > > > On Feb 13, 2006, at 7:07 PM, Mimi Yin wrote: > > > >> Ted, > >> > >> I think one of the issues of pulling together an HTML page that > >> incorporated some Chandler landing page elements to tie the landing > >> pages together was that it would require resources (ie. Matt) for > >> building it. > >> > >> There seem to be 2 issues: > >> > >> 1. Resources and time (less design and more front-end implementation, > >> I think whether we do a wiki page or a custom HTML page, the design > >> team will have to expend a comparable amount of effort) > >> > >> 2. What is the cost of waiting on a custom landing page until 0.2? > >> > >> All things being equal, a scaled down custom landing page that feels > >> like it's a member of the ecosystem (as in related to Chandler) would > >> be great. But 2 questions are: > >> + Can we accomplish this AND release on time? > >> + If not, are we willing to hold the release for a custom landing page? > >> > >> Mimi > >> > >> On Feb 13, 2006, at 6:24 PM, Ted Leung wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Pieter, > >>> > >>> Pieter Hartsook wrote: > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> There have been some discussions regarding a "landing page" for the > >>>> Scooby project that we thought we should take to the maillists for > >>>> comments. > >>>> > >>> I'm confused about what you are asking for here, other than a high > >>> level of visual polish. > >>> When we left the meeting last week > >>> <http://wiki.osafoundation.org/bin/view/Journal/MtgNotes0208>, > >>> I thought that we had agreed on a plan for the landing page, which > >>> called for incorporating elements > >>> from the Chandler project page (the left side navigation) into the > >>> Scooby project page. > >>>> When Scooby 0.1 is released we will have three major components of the > >>>> Chandler ecosystem in place as official active OSAF projects; > >>>> Chandler, Cosmo, and Scooby. For each project we want to make it easy > >>>> for potential developers and others to quickly and effortlessly get > >>>> information about the project in order to encourage them to get > >>>> involved and begin to build an active community. This effort is in > >>>> keeping with Fogel's observations about packaging and presentation: > >>>> > >>>> "A related mistake is that of skimping on presentation and packaging, > >>>> figuring that these can always be done later, when the project is well > >>>> under way. Presentation and packaging comprise a wide range of tasks, > >>>> all revolving around the theme of reducing the barrier to entry. > >>>> Making the project inviting to the uninitiated means writing user and > >>>> developer documentation, setting up a project web site that's > >>>> informative to newcomers, automating as much of the software's > >>>> compilation and installation as possible, etc." > >>>> --- Producing Open Source Software: How to Run a Successful Free > >>>> Software Project by Karl Fogel, p. 10 > >>>> > >>>> When Chandler 0.6 was released we collected information from various > >>>> sources and created the Chandler landing page > >>>> <http://chandler.osafoundation.org> as visually appealing home page > >>>> for the project that organizes and clearly leads visitors to > >>>> appropriate pages for more information. Some of the links on the > >>>> landing page go to wiki pages, some to the OSAF website, some to the > >>>> group blog, and some to secondary html pages on the landing page site > >>>> itself. By creating the landing page site instead of using the wiki we > >>>> had more control over the design of the page and made it more > >>>> attractive and easier to understand and navigate. > >>>> > >>>> We of course want to provide those interested in Cosmo and Scooby with > >>>> similar easy-of-entry access to information about those projects as > >>>> well. The question at hand is, What do we do over the next couple of > >>>> weeks to prepare a landing page for the initial 0.1 release of Scooby? > >>>> > >>>> There are a continuum of solutions: > >>>> 1) At one end we can create a "landing page" on the wiki and simply > >>>> continue to provide a redirect from <http://scooby.osafoundation.org> > >>>> to the wiki. > >>>> 2) We could make a simple html, mostly text-based page that would free > >>>> the landing page from the wiki navigation and editing kruft and allow > >>>> a more appealing presentation of the content. > >>>> 3) We could borrow from the work done on the Chandler landing page, > >>>> keeping much of the navigation aids and style the same but modifying > >>>> the content to target the Scooby 0.1 release. > >>>> > >>>> At this point, I'll interject my opinion, that if time and resources > >>>> allow, I am in favor of option #3. I see the advantages that Fogel > >>>> pointed out in having good presentation in the project web site early > >>>> in the project in order to lower the barriers to entry. I also believe > >>>> reusing similar design elements on the different project landing pages > >>>> not only makes it easier for someone who is familiar with one project > >>>> to more easily find their way in a sister project, but it subtly > >>>> reiniforces the familial relationship among the projects. > >>>> > >>>> There is some concern that a graphically polished landing page for > >>>> Scooby may inappropriately set expectations that the software is more > >>>> mature than the 0.1 release is. I think that we can set expectations > >>>> appropriately through the messaging/content on the page. And as the > >>>> project matures we can maintain the interface and change the > >>>> expectation messaging. Similarly, at this early stage in the Scooby > >>>> project some of the documentation (like some of the features and > >>>> functionality) may not have been created yet. Again, going back to > >>>> Fogel... > >>>> > >>> If you look at the website for Subversion, which is the project > >>> Fogel is currently working on, you'll see that our project pages > >>> go way beyond the Subversion site in terms of graphics, etc. I'm > >>> sure that Fogel finds the Subversion site adequate to the task. So I > >>> don't really think that we need to spend a huge amount of effort > >>> beyond the basic look of the Chandler project page. > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Scooby mailing list > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> http://lists.osafoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scooby > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Scooby mailing list > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> http://lists.osafoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scooby > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Scooby mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://lists.osafoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scooby > _______________________________________________ > Scooby mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.osafoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scooby _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Open Source Applications Foundation "General" mailing list http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/general
