On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 5:27 PM, jan iversen <[email protected]> wrote: > Having thought a bit more about the current discussion, I think I made a > mistake. > > If you look back in the mail list, you will see that I raised the issue on > how to do it and if I should do it, before I started, and got positive > feedback, including ideas of how to progress. Then I went ahead and made > the site, NOT a complete new design or content but a simple translation of > the existing content, with a filter removing outdated information. > > And now after having spent the time (including much appreciated help from > ariel and rob) , I lean it was all wrong and basically I should never have > tampered with that site. >
I've had that happen to myself a couple times as well. Very frustrating. IMHO in these cases there are a few possibilities: 1) Was the original proposal given enough time for review? 72 hours lazy consensus is the minimum. But more time may be needed in some cases. 2) Sometimes opinions or preferences can sound like objections. We all need to learn to offer encouraging feedback. Our rarest commodity is not "The One True Design", Our rarest commodity is volunteer time. The good-enough design that someone is willing to work on is better (IMHO) than the perfect one that no one is volunteering to do. 3) If objections come up, that suggests we just slow down and talk it over more, find a compromise. > So please allow me to make another proposal: > > simply drop my pages and let l10n live as it is, then someone with more > knowledge than me will hopefully clean it up sometime. > Sorry I didn't see this note in time. I've already moved the content from l10n-new over to l10n per the last exchange I had with Alexandro, which I thought resolved his concerns. None of the old pages were removed. They are still there. Based on the previous discussion I think we should evaluate what of the existing content is still relevant, and if it is then update that content and link it into the new design. Regards, -Rob > I have enough to do with the new process, this cleanup was for me an > opportunity to get deeper into how are web site works, and at the same time > (in my opinion) make a contribution that would bring us forward. > > Jan. > > > On 2 November 2012 21:59, jan iversen <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Just one word...the work I have done on l10n, does not in a single word >> talk about the new process !!! >> >> It is on purpose, the new process is in development, and as long as it is >> not active, I (as a person) will not put it on l10n, or other pages, with >> the exception of a single Wiki page, used for discussion. >> >> Jan. >> >> >> >> On 2 November 2012 17:46, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Alexandro Colorado <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 6:54 AM, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > >>> >> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 3:06 AM, Alexandro Colorado <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >> > On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 2:43 PM, jan iversen <[email protected] >>> > >>> >> wrote: >>> >> > >>> >> >> On 1 November 2012 21:04, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 3:49 PM, jan iversen < >>> [email protected]> >>> >> >> > wrote: >>> >> >> > > Please could you try it, I might be blind but I get an empty >>> page. >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > OK. I had to do an update first, to suck it into the CMS. But >>> then >>> >> >> > when I went to edit brand,mdtext, I saw the "edit" area, which was >>> >> >> > blank, and directly beneath that another edit control called "Page >>> >> >> > Header" that contained the lines like "home: home". >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> I think "page header" is restricted to people with the correct >>> karma. I >>> >> >> cannot see it. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > So here it is now: http://www.openoffice.org/l10n-new/ >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > > However that is not soo important, Ariel made a perfect >>> job...and I >>> >> >> have >>> >> >> > > just posted (through cms) the other changed (index and leftnav). >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> > > Do you think it is about time to make the site "official" ? >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > It needs some more editing and content, but the structure looks >>> good >>> >> >> > now. Something we can build on. Was the idea to wipe clean the >>> >> >> > existing l10n directory and move this version in? >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> Yes, my idea was to start on the rock bottom, and then I could (as >>> well >>> >> as >>> >> >> others) add more content. It is difficult to add contents when the >>> >> >> structure is unstable. >>> >> >> >>> >> > >>> >> > That is what I was afraid off, this is just a horrible way to work >>> with. >>> >> If >>> >> > we go with Jan way of working we would be trashing projects left and >>> >> right, >>> >> > loosing data every guy that comes back and pick it up. If he gets >>> bored, >>> >> > the next guy will trash it's work and "start from rock bottom". >>> >> > >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> No one is trashing projects left and right. No one is losing data. >>> >> We're not discussing future developers, etc. If you have any >>> >> technical approaches with the current approach, or if there is some >>> >> existing content on the l10n site that you think should remain live on >>> >> the website, then please speak up. >>> >> >>> > >>> >> Looking at Google Analytics data for the old l10n site, from August >>> >> through September, I see the following total number of page hits >>> >> (total for the two months, not total per day): >>> >> >>> > >>> > I previously update many of the original l10n site, most of the content >>> > that is really irrelevant is unlinked. The pages that have questiable >>> > relevance are updated on the contact information, and the resources are >>> > well there. I want to know for example what would happened to the >>> existing >>> > glossaries. >>> > >>> > The area that talk about TCM will be update with LinkTest information? >>> will >>> > Linktest be used at all? >>> > >>> > I see many repeating sites like how_to_join.html on both projects, just >>> > updating the page with the l10n-new would be sufficient. >>> > >>> > IMO all this work from jan should have gone to one page >>> > "localization/L10n_pilotprocess.html,", and from them moved on to the >>> > different sites. I understand the actual structural changes like the >>> > templates and contextual menus would be added files to the site. >>> > >>> > I would promote for deletion like you said, l10n/languages.html >>> > l10n/download/en-GB.html, project/l10n/languages.html only because they >>> > have nothing to do with the project, or have duplicated within the l10n >>> > project. example "supported languages". >>> > >>> >>> OK how about we do this: We copy Jan's new files into l10n, having it >>> be the new look and feel and default index.html. Then we can hook up >>> relevant legacy content to the new home page. Stuff that is not >>> hooked up, because it is outdated or superseded by new pages -- this >>> we can delete or ignore as appropriate. >>> >>> In other words, we separate the new look and feel of the website from >>> the proposed new process. >>> >>> -Rob >>> >>> > >>> > >>> >> >>> >> Page,Pageviews >>> >> /l10n/languages.html,1077 >>> >> /l10n/download/en-GB.html,496 >>> >> /l10n/index.html,255 >>> >> /l10n/adding_language.html,156 >>> >> /l10n/localization/translation.html,145 >>> >> /l10n/localization/OpenOffice_Glossary.html,88 >>> >> /l10n/localization/About_TCM.html,54 >>> >> /l10n/localization/English_Russian_OOo_Glossary.html,47 >>> >> /l10n/L10N_Framework/iso_code_build2.html,40 >>> >> /l10n/i18n_framework/HowToAddEncoding.html,38 >>> >> /l10n/all_supported_languages.html,35 >>> >> /project/l10n/languages.html,33 >>> >> /l10n/i18n_framework/Vertical_Writing_in_Calc.html,28 >>> >> /l10n/i18n_framework/Vertical_writing_in_Writer.html,23 >>> >> /l10n/how-to-join.html,20 >>> >> /l10n/i18n_framework/LocaleData.html,19 >>> >> /l10n/localization/L10n_testplan.html,19 >>> >> /l10n/i18n_framework/Grid_layout_for_CJK.html,18 >>> >> /l10n/localization/English_Greek_OOo_Glossary.html,18 >>> >> /l10n/extract_merge.html,16 >>> >> /l10n/irc-channel.html,11 >>> >> /l10n/L10N_Framework/How_to_localize_and_build_OpenOffice.html,10 >>> >> /l10n/L10N_Framework/Intermediate_file_format.html,10 >>> >> /l10n/i18n_framework/CTL_Feature_Priorisation.html,8 >>> >> /l10n/mailing-lists.html,8 >>> >> /l10n/localization/Translation_Tips.html,7 >>> >> /l10n/i18n_framework/HowToAddLocaleInI18n.html,6 >>> >> /l10n/localization/L10n_pilotprocess.html,6 >>> >> /l10n/localization/English_Serbian_OOo_Glossary.html,5 >>> >> >>> >> So there is some things getting traffic, although some of these same >>> >> pages are far out of date. For example, the en-GB download page is >>> >> pointing to an ancient 2.02 version of OOo. >>> >> >>> >> Since in many cases there are external links to these pages, I'd >>> >> recommend a bulk move to an /archive directory. If the content is >>> >> worth keeping, it is worth keeping in the same location, and worth >>> >> keeping up to date. Otherwise we should delete and know that >>> >> Subversion has a copy for archival purposes. And if a page has been >>> >> superseded by a new page, we should keep the same HTML page name, so >>> >> external links will automatically point to the updated content. >>> >> >>> >> -Rob >>> >> >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Alexandro Colorado >>> > PPMC Apache OpenOffice >>> > http://es.openoffice.org >>> >> >>
