On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 12:23 AM, Kevin Grignon <kevingrignon...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Drew and Rob, > > I'll defer to your experience with the OO recruiting. Your comments make > sense. > > The key point I wanted to make was that I feel that diversity is a good > thing, and that product design need not solely the domain of technical > people. Yes, the offering is software and that requires significant > implementation effort, however, other disciplines can contribute > to requirements research, validation and feature design and product > evaluation. > > Perhaps we could look at the effort as opensource product design, as much > as opensource development. > > Just a thought. > > For my part, I'm interested in re-establishing our user experience design > capabilities and in time, I hope we can roll out a strategy to recruit more > product design-oriented contributors (user researchers, interaction > designers, visual designers and usabilty evaluators.) > > Hi Kevin, These are all great points. One idea. The following page is our primary "get involved" page for the project. It is linked to prominently from the www.openoffice.org homepage and gets many, many hits: http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/get-involved.html That page then links to this "help wanted" page on the wiki, with more details: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Help+Wanted If you have any suggestions on how these pages could be updated, I can help you get the changes applied. Actually, for the wiki page, you can just sign up for an account. Also, after 3.4 releases we could have a blog post about user experience and the desire to establish a nucleus of expertise here at the project. That could help attract interest. -Rob Regards, > Kevin > > > On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 1:03 PM, drew jensen <drewjensen.in...@gmail.com > >wrote: > > > On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 23:21 -0400, Rob Weir wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 12:35 PM, drew jensen < > > drewjensen.in...@gmail.com>wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, 2012-03-29 at 09:04 -0400, Rob Weir wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Kevin Grignon < > > > > kevingrignon...@gmail.com>wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Rob, > > > > > > > > > > > > Sounds like we can appeal to contributors intrinsic and extrinsic > > > > > > motivation. > > > > > > > > > > > > Another newbie question: Does OO have any experience recruiting > > > > > > non-technical volunteers. Many disciplines outside coding can > have > > an > > > > > > impact on the offering. Product management, UX, ID, training, > > visual > > > > > > design, marketing, communications, etc. How might we position > > > > ourselves as > > > > > > open product development? A wider net would attract the diverse > > skills > > > > that > > > > > > could really make the effort a success long term. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See this page here, which our central "how can I help page": > > > > > http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/get-involved.html > > > > > > > > > > So we need and value contributors in a wide range of disciplines, > not > > > > just > > > > > technical ones. > > > > > > > > > Hola Rob, Kevin > > > > > > > > Just an aside, if you will. At this years FOSDEM there was a panel > > > > discussion consisting of a number of the community managers. Included > > > > IIRC was openSUSE, Fedora, Debian, Ubuntu (in this case the speaker > was > > > > specifically from the LoCo team project, not Ubuntu overall)...and a > > > > couple others whose affiliation I can not recall. > > > > > > > > One topic, which would be germane here, was on recruiting > contributors. > > > > > > > > Across the panel the participants felt that finding and retaining > > > > _quality_ non-coding contributors has proven to be more difficult > then > > > > coders. Unfortunately that was the extent of the topic discussion, > they > > > > all agreed but not a single one went into Why they thought this was, > or > > > > what particular obstacles, procedural or cultural, might be involved, > > or > > > > what actions if any they have implemented to address the situation. > > > > > > > > > > > I think OpenOffice has had the opposite problem. We have a long > > tradition > > > of having quality non-coding contributors, especially in areas like > > > translation, marketing, documentation, support, etc. But we had an > > > over-reliance on corporate-sponsored engineers from a single company > for > > > coding. If I look at the project today, I see volunteers for > non-coding > > > items volunteering on the list on a near-daily basis. But not so often > > for > > > coding volunteers. > > > > Hi Rob, > > > > Yes, you and I it would seem concur on our observational assessment of > > the current situation. > > > > > > > > In any case, my point was not really about coders versus non-coders. > > There > > > is enough work to go around. My concern was more that we're not doing > a > > > great job at getting new contributors involved in the project. Look at > > our > > > committers list. We have nearly 100 now. How many of them are > actually > > > new, e.g., were not involved with the legacy OpenOffice.org project. > > Sure, > > > there are a few, but not many. > > > > > > Now look at the list archives for how many people of volunteered to > help > > > with the documentation, with the website, with UI, with testing, etc. > > How > > > many of them were able to break into actually contributing to the > > project. > > > Almost none of them, right? > > > > Yes, I'd agree. I also think it's fair to say, self forming volunteer > > organizations fit the pattern in general - and therefore even more so > > requires active attention always. > > > > > > > > So the issue, as I see it, is not an issue with attracting volunteers. > > It > > > isan issue of helping the volunteers get started and helping them meet > > > their goals in project participation. > > > > Sure, no argument here on any of that. I'd follow up from the first > > paragraph, and add that IMO the new actors most needed right now are > > those fitting the thin area - engineering. > > > > I think this means that; from those doing the engineering, particularly > > those making decisions on the directions the code will be developed > > going forward a need to be mindful to keep the required processes open > > and transparent - pick your term here, and I hope all understand what I > > mean here.. this is in no way an indictment but rather statemtnt of what > > I see as a general principle > > - so that those whom would be interested in such work will know it is > > here. > > > > I think this is the first step in attracting engineering resources. > > > > From there then yes, the group needs to be proactive with organizing > > hackfeasts, or activities of such like, the non-engineering contributors > > can only at best help with this not drive it forward. > > > > Anyhow - A long, rambling response, befitting a late Friday night, and > > all surrounded of course by IMO ;) > > > > //drew > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Rob > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyhow, just thought I'd pass it along. BTW I watched this on a live > > > > video stream but the panel discussion may be available in an on-line > > > > archive, I don't know one way of the other. > > > > > > > > //drew > > > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
