Bjoern,
I agree in part with you, but the need to have these features listed
somewhere not too buried has been identified. That, however does not mean
we should not rethink our website and presentation on community, the
project, etc. I am just trying to break down work items in a way that
volunte
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 08:36:52AM +0200, Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
> Let have both. Features list is usually requested strongly by local groups.
Yes, but is that the question that we should ask ourselves when putting
something on the webpage? Or rather: What helps us grow users and esp.
contributo
e able to search for stories of "banking sector" adoption, "brazil
users" adoption and so on.
Dhiren
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 02:03:38 +0200
From: bjoern.michael...@canonical.com
To: marketing@global.libreoffice.org
Subject: [libreoffice-marketing] Otto Kekäläinens talk -- prop
Let have both. Features list is usually requested strongly by local groups.
Best,
Charles.
Le 25 oct. 2012 02:04, "Bjoern Michaelsen"
a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> walking through the slides at (I didnt see the talk):
>
> http://fsfe.org/news/2012/news-20121022-01.en.html
>
> I have to agree: The adopto
3:38 +0200
> From: bjoern.michael...@canonical.com
> To: marketing@global.libreoffice.org
> Subject: [libreoffice-marketing] Otto Kekäläinens talk -- proposing to kill
> the "features" section on the webpage, have "adopters" section instead
>
> Hi,
>
> walking
Hi,
walking through the slides at (I didnt see the talk):
http://fsfe.org/news/2012/news-20121022-01.en.html
I have to agree: The adoptors need to be right on the frontpage. Lets instead
kill the section:
https://www.libreoffice.org/features/
(excepting the "new in 3.X" sections). Those page
