You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> on 2011/11/09 23:19:15 UTC
[DISCUSS][WWW] Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org
As many of you may know, per Dave's announcement about a week or so ago, we
have a staging site of *MOST* (we're still finding areas that need to be
"re-pulled" for one reason or another), of the (old) current OO.o site at:
http://ooo-site.apache.org
Right now, I have a question about the existing "pl" (Polish) site at
http://pl.openoffice.org/
Does anyone on this list know anything about the history of the Polish site
-- why this group decided to basically make a duplicate of the
OpenOffice.org site but translated? None of the other N-L sites have gone
to this length so I'm just curious about it.
Also, at this point in our migration plans, do we have anyone here who is
willing to continue to maintain the "pl" site as it stands?
Also note, this site has not yet been ported over to the staging site.
And finally, I am having a few problems getting my recent changes to the
N-L page to actually "publish" so no fun link from the staging home page
yet.
<http://ooo-site.apache.org/>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged
by the way its animals are treated."
-- Mohandas Gandhi
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org
Posted by Louis Suárez-Potts <ls...@gmail.com>.
hi
On 10 November 2011 15:05, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 2:54 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts <lo...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> On 10 November 2011 12:40, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> I have noticed as each N-L project is ported that they are all unique. Each community has made its own choices about what is in the "site". At the ASF the PPMC must be responsible for governing the project. We must find a way to be a global community, yet we also need to follow a few rules.
>>
>>
>> I quite agree. The issue with us, was that we needed—or I felt we
>> needed—to grow exponentially, and fast. But at this point, I do
>> believe that autonomy is great, but autonomy without community is a
>> nonstarter, and a community only can sustain itself by agreeing to
>> core beliefs and practices. As we no longer have corporate overlords
>> here in Apache land, and as we really are a community driven thing, a
>> res publica, then I would suggest that one of our topmost orders of
>> business be the communal crafting and articulation and posting of a
>> manifesto—a declaration of identity within Apache—that gives guidance
>> as well as identity to Apache OO's members/contributors.
>>
>
> We will need to have a "charter" when we graduate:
>
yes.
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#tlp-resolution
>
> Maybe you want to start drafting that on the wiki? Sure, graduation
> is a ways away, but there is no harm in having a scratchpad for
> recording ideas whenever anyone feels inspired.
Yes; that was the idea behind my idea: to have an idea all can
identify with or circle around (Think of my favourite Wallace Stevens
poem; sure you know it). (Sorry, it's near dinner time and blood sugar
be low.)
>
> -Rob
>
>
>> Cheers
>> louis
-louis
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 2:54 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts <lo...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi
>
> On 10 November 2011 12:40, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> I have noticed as each N-L project is ported that they are all unique. Each community has made its own choices about what is in the "site". At the ASF the PPMC must be responsible for governing the project. We must find a way to be a global community, yet we also need to follow a few rules.
>
>
> I quite agree. The issue with us, was that we needed—or I felt we
> needed—to grow exponentially, and fast. But at this point, I do
> believe that autonomy is great, but autonomy without community is a
> nonstarter, and a community only can sustain itself by agreeing to
> core beliefs and practices. As we no longer have corporate overlords
> here in Apache land, and as we really are a community driven thing, a
> res publica, then I would suggest that one of our topmost orders of
> business be the communal crafting and articulation and posting of a
> manifesto—a declaration of identity within Apache—that gives guidance
> as well as identity to Apache OO's members/contributors.
>
We will need to have a "charter" when we graduate:
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#tlp-resolution
Maybe you want to start drafting that on the wiki? Sure, graduation
is a ways away, but there is no harm in having a scratchpad for
recording ideas whenever anyone feels inspired.
-Rob
> Cheers
> louis
>
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org
Posted by Louis Suárez-Potts <lo...@apache.org>.
Hi
On 10 November 2011 12:40, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
> I have noticed as each N-L project is ported that they are all unique. Each community has made its own choices about what is in the "site". At the ASF the PPMC must be responsible for governing the project. We must find a way to be a global community, yet we also need to follow a few rules.
I quite agree. The issue with us, was that we needed—or I felt we
needed—to grow exponentially, and fast. But at this point, I do
believe that autonomy is great, but autonomy without community is a
nonstarter, and a community only can sustain itself by agreeing to
core beliefs and practices. As we no longer have corporate overlords
here in Apache land, and as we really are a community driven thing, a
res publica, then I would suggest that one of our topmost orders of
business be the communal crafting and articulation and posting of a
manifesto—a declaration of identity within Apache—that gives guidance
as well as identity to Apache OO's members/contributors.
Cheers
louis
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Hi Marcin,
Welcome to Apache OpenOffice(.org) (incubating)!
On Nov 10, 2011, at 12:39 AM, Marcin Miłkowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> W dniu 2011-11-10 05:37, Louis Suárez-Potts pisze:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> On 9 November 2011 18:06, Dave Fisher<da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Nov 9, 2011, at 2:19 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>
>>>> As many of you may know, per Dave's announcement about a week or so ago, we
>>>> have a staging site of *MOST* (we're still finding areas that need to be
>>>> "re-pulled" for one reason or another), of the (old) current OO.o site at:
>>>>
>>>> http://ooo-site.apache.org
>>>>
>>>> Right now, I have a question about the existing "pl" (Polish) site at
>>>>
>>>> http://pl.openoffice.org/
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone on this list know anything about the history of the Polish site
>>>> -- why this group decided to basically make a duplicate of the
>>>> OpenOffice.org site but translated? None of the other N-L sites have gone
>>>> to this length so I'm just curious about it.
>>
>> Yes, I know much about it. Its history is complicated and its
>> communities even more so. But its current lead (of PL group working on
>> OOo, if not entirely only on OOo itself) has simplified things.
>
> It is not a duplicate, but anyway, the point of localized pages is that they host content that is useful to users that do not speak English. If you think that the OOo site was useful, then you might consider that translating some parts of it might be somehow justified ;)
>
> Anyway, it mostly contains pointers to other places, and some news parts. There are lists of books and courses about OOo, and some installation instructions that were relevant when the Polish dictionary was not bundled with OOo.
I noticed the hyphenation dictionaries, bat files and exe files. Very interesting.
I have noticed as each N-L project is ported that they are all unique. Each community has made its own choices about what is in the "site". At the ASF the PPMC must be responsible for governing the project. We must find a way to be a global community, yet we also need to follow a few rules.
Best Regards,
Dave
>
>>>
>>> Is it bigger than the German site?
>>
>> No.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Also, at this point in our migration plans, do we have anyone here who is
>>>> willing to continue to maintain the "pl" site as it stands?
>>
>> I can ask the former lead; cc'd here. He is Marcin Milkowski.
>
> I don't think anyone is interested in maintaining it anymore. The Polish community moved to LibreOffice and they consider Apache project as a fork. I didn't resign from the Polish lead position but as there's only me left and I have no time for doing anything, the Polish project at OOo is somewhat zombified.
>
> Cheers,
> Marcin
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
Hi Marcin and thanks for the reply...
2011/11/10 Marcin Miłkowski <mi...@o2.pl>
> Hi,
>
> W dniu 2011-11-10 05:37, Louis Suárez-Potts pisze:
>
> Hi,
>>
>>
>> On 9 November 2011 18:06, Dave Fisher<da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 9, 2011, at 2:19 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>
>>> As many of you may know, per Dave's announcement about a week or so
>>>> ago, we
>>>> have a staging site of *MOST* (we're still finding areas that need to be
>>>> "re-pulled" for one reason or another), of the (old) current OO.o site
>>>> at:
>>>>
>>>> http://ooo-site.apache.org
>>>>
>>>> Right now, I have a question about the existing "pl" (Polish) site at
>>>>
>>>> http://pl.openoffice.org/
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone on this list know anything about the history of the Polish
>>>> site
>>>> -- why this group decided to basically make a duplicate of the
>>>> OpenOffice.org site but translated? None of the other N-L sites have
>>>> gone
>>>> to this length so I'm just curious about it.
>>>>
>>>
>> Yes, I know much about it. Its history is complicated and its
>> communities even more so. But its current lead (of PL group working on
>> OOo, if not entirely only on OOo itself) has simplified things.
>>
>
> It is not a duplicate, but anyway, the point of localized pages is that
> they host content that is useful to users that do not speak English. If you
> think that the OOo site was useful, then you might consider that
> translating some parts of it might be somehow justified ;)
>
> Anyway, it mostly contains pointers to other places, and some news parts.
> There are lists of books and courses about OOo, and some installation
> instructions that were relevant when the Polish dictionary was not bundled
> with OOo.
>
>
>
>>> Is it bigger than the German site?
>>>
>>
>> No.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Also, at this point in our migration plans, do we have anyone here who
>>>> is
>>>> willing to continue to maintain the "pl" site as it stands?
>>>>
>>>
>> I can ask the former lead; cc'd here. He is Marcin Milkowski.
>>
>
> I don't think anyone is interested in maintaining it anymore. The Polish
> community moved to LibreOffice and they consider Apache project as a fork.
> I didn't resign from the Polish lead position but as there's only me left
> and I have no time for doing anything, the Polish project at OOo is
> somewhat zombified.
>
> Cheers,
> Marcin
>
Well OK...I guess we will just check it in to the svn repository as Dave
suggests but perhaps not "link" it in to the list of N-L sites.
Thanks again for your response.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged
by the way its animals are treated."
-- Mohandas Gandhi
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org
Posted by Marcin Miłkowski <mi...@o2.pl>.
Hi,
W dniu 2011-11-10 05:37, Louis Suárez-Potts pisze:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 9 November 2011 18:06, Dave Fisher<da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> On Nov 9, 2011, at 2:19 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>
>>> As many of you may know, per Dave's announcement about a week or so ago, we
>>> have a staging site of *MOST* (we're still finding areas that need to be
>>> "re-pulled" for one reason or another), of the (old) current OO.o site at:
>>>
>>> http://ooo-site.apache.org
>>>
>>> Right now, I have a question about the existing "pl" (Polish) site at
>>>
>>> http://pl.openoffice.org/
>>>
>>> Does anyone on this list know anything about the history of the Polish site
>>> -- why this group decided to basically make a duplicate of the
>>> OpenOffice.org site but translated? None of the other N-L sites have gone
>>> to this length so I'm just curious about it.
>
> Yes, I know much about it. Its history is complicated and its
> communities even more so. But its current lead (of PL group working on
> OOo, if not entirely only on OOo itself) has simplified things.
It is not a duplicate, but anyway, the point of localized pages is that
they host content that is useful to users that do not speak English. If
you think that the OOo site was useful, then you might consider that
translating some parts of it might be somehow justified ;)
Anyway, it mostly contains pointers to other places, and some news
parts. There are lists of books and courses about OOo, and some
installation instructions that were relevant when the Polish dictionary
was not bundled with OOo.
>>
>> Is it bigger than the German site?
>
> No.
>>
>>>
>>> Also, at this point in our migration plans, do we have anyone here who is
>>> willing to continue to maintain the "pl" site as it stands?
>
> I can ask the former lead; cc'd here. He is Marcin Milkowski.
I don't think anyone is interested in maintaining it anymore. The Polish
community moved to LibreOffice and they consider Apache project as a
fork. I didn't resign from the Polish lead position but as there's only
me left and I have no time for doing anything, the Polish project at OOo
is somewhat zombified.
Cheers,
Marcin
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Somehow the zombie metaphor is apt.
The question is who does the voodoo that you do so well. Fugu? Or blowfish?
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 9, 2011, at 9:26 PM, "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org> wrote:
> Unfortunately[?], zombies.org is taken. But kingzombie.org seems to be available. Thanks for bringing playfulness to this place. You've been missed, Louis.
>
>
> - Dennis E. Hamilton
> tools for document interoperability, <http://nfoWorks.org/>
> dennis.hamilton@acm.org gsm: +1-206-779-9430 @orcmid
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: luispo@gmail.com [mailto:luispo@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Louis Suárez-Potts
> Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 20:38
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: milek_pl@o2.pl
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org
>
> [ ... ]
>
> Cheers,
> Louis <-former this, that, and the other thing. Now, just former
> (un)king of the zombies? ;-)
>>
RE: [DISCUSS][WWW] Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
Unfortunately[?], zombies.org is taken. But kingzombie.org seems to be available. Thanks for bringing playfulness to this place. You've been missed, Louis.
- Dennis E. Hamilton
tools for document interoperability, <http://nfoWorks.org/>
dennis.hamilton@acm.org gsm: +1-206-779-9430 @orcmid
-----Original Message-----
From: luispo@gmail.com [mailto:luispo@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Louis Suárez-Potts
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 20:38
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc: milek_pl@o2.pl
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org
[ ... ]
Cheers,
Louis <-former this, that, and the other thing. Now, just former
(un)king of the zombies? ;-)
>
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org
Posted by Louis Suárez-Potts <lo...@apache.org>.
Hi,
On 9 November 2011 18:06, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> On Nov 9, 2011, at 2:19 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>
>> As many of you may know, per Dave's announcement about a week or so ago, we
>> have a staging site of *MOST* (we're still finding areas that need to be
>> "re-pulled" for one reason or another), of the (old) current OO.o site at:
>>
>> http://ooo-site.apache.org
>>
>> Right now, I have a question about the existing "pl" (Polish) site at
>>
>> http://pl.openoffice.org/
>>
>> Does anyone on this list know anything about the history of the Polish site
>> -- why this group decided to basically make a duplicate of the
>> OpenOffice.org site but translated? None of the other N-L sites have gone
>> to this length so I'm just curious about it.
Yes, I know much about it. Its history is complicated and its
communities even more so. But its current lead (of PL group working on
OOo, if not entirely only on OOo itself) has simplified things.
>
> Is it bigger than the German site?
No.
>
>>
>> Also, at this point in our migration plans, do we have anyone here who is
>> willing to continue to maintain the "pl" site as it stands?
I can ask the former lead; cc'd here. He is Marcin Milkowski.
>
> I think we want to check it in, but then we may want to then remove most of each N-L site (they will be in SVN!)
Yes. As the (former/current) lead of the N-L category, which I
founded, I can surely help here in communicating to the interested
leads the updates and plans.
>
>> Also note, this site has not yet been ported over to the staging site.
>>
Noted.
Do we have a schedule (that I've surely missed) of migrations/port?
>> And finally, I am having a few problems getting my recent changes to the
>> N-L page to actually "publish" so no fun link from the staging home page
>> yet.
>> <http://ooo-site.apache.org/>
I see. Sigh; sounds so much like old times.
>
> I published these just now.
>
> Warning - using the webgui the first time on ooo-site it is suggested that you brew a cup of coffee and come back in 10 minutes.
>
> I've discussed the foo.openoffice.org/bar to www.openoffice.org/foo/bar permanent redirect for the ooo-site Virtual Host and openoffice.org DNS with Joe today - we should specify a full list of the subdomains that will fit this pattern and add it to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-3933
Please.
>
> When the time comes to go live Infra will handle the rest of the detail.
Okay, let's keep us all informed…..
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>
Cheers,
Louis <-former this, that, and the other thing. Now, just former
(un)king of the zombies? ;-)
>
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org
Posted by Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org>.
On 2011-11-10 8:44 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 3:06 PM, Dave Fisher<da...@comcast.net> wrote:
...snip...
>> Warning - using the webgui the first time on ooo-site it is suggested that
>> you brew a cup of coffee and come back in 10 minutes.
>>
>
> well I didn't use this -- just svn and the publish.pl CLI, but still .. oh
> my!
I'll freely admit I don't always understand how the webgui for the CMS
is doing it's magic. But yes - depending on how you use it, the first
time you edit a file using the webgui on a new source tree, it may need
to complete a full checkout of that tree (on it's server), which might
take a while before the build completes.
In most cases, after that, it uses the cached/previously checked out
tree, so changes afterwards should be quick.
But this conversation does show a key "hidden" feature of the CMS: it
makes site editing simple for everyone: both those who just want to
tweak something while they're browsing a page, or for those who prefer
the command line or are even just checking in interim files without
looking to publish yet.
Thanks Joe!
- Shane
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 3:06 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> On Nov 9, 2011, at 2:19 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>
> > As many of you may know, per Dave's announcement about a week or so ago,
> we
> > have a staging site of *MOST* (we're still finding areas that need to be
> > "re-pulled" for one reason or another), of the (old) current OO.o site
> at:
> >
> > http://ooo-site.apache.org
> >
> > Right now, I have a question about the existing "pl" (Polish) site at
> >
> > http://pl.openoffice.org/
> >
> > Does anyone on this list know anything about the history of the Polish
> site
> > -- why this group decided to basically make a duplicate of the
> > OpenOffice.org site but translated? None of the other N-L sites have gone
> > to this length so I'm just curious about it.
>
> Is it bigger than the German site?
>
> >
> > Also, at this point in our migration plans, do we have anyone here who is
> > willing to continue to maintain the "pl" site as it stands?
>
> I think we want to check it in, but then we may want to then remove most
> of each N-L site (they will be in SVN!)
>
> > Also note, this site has not yet been ported over to the staging site.
> >
> > And finally, I am having a few problems getting my recent changes to the
> > N-L page to actually "publish" so no fun link from the staging home page
> > yet.
> > <http://ooo-site.apache.org/>
>
> I published these just now.
>
ok, thanks.
>
> Warning - using the webgui the first time on ooo-site it is suggested that
> you brew a cup of coffee and come back in 10 minutes.
>
well I didn't use this -- just svn and the publish.pl CLI, but still .. oh
my!
>
> I've discussed the foo.openoffice.org/bar to www.openoffice.org/foo/barpermanent redirect for the ooo-site Virtual Host and
> openoffice.org DNS with Joe today - we should specify a full list of the
> subdomains that will fit this pattern and add it to
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-3933
>
> When the time comes to go live Infra will handle the rest of the detail.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>
> > --
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > MzK
> >
> > "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged
> > by the way its animals are treated."
> > -- Mohandas Gandhi
>
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged
by the way its animals are treated."
-- Mohandas Gandhi
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Nov 9, 2011, at 2:19 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> As many of you may know, per Dave's announcement about a week or so ago, we
> have a staging site of *MOST* (we're still finding areas that need to be
> "re-pulled" for one reason or another), of the (old) current OO.o site at:
>
> http://ooo-site.apache.org
>
> Right now, I have a question about the existing "pl" (Polish) site at
>
> http://pl.openoffice.org/
>
> Does anyone on this list know anything about the history of the Polish site
> -- why this group decided to basically make a duplicate of the
> OpenOffice.org site but translated? None of the other N-L sites have gone
> to this length so I'm just curious about it.
Is it bigger than the German site?
>
> Also, at this point in our migration plans, do we have anyone here who is
> willing to continue to maintain the "pl" site as it stands?
I think we want to check it in, but then we may want to then remove most of each N-L site (they will be in SVN!)
> Also note, this site has not yet been ported over to the staging site.
>
> And finally, I am having a few problems getting my recent changes to the
> N-L page to actually "publish" so no fun link from the staging home page
> yet.
> <http://ooo-site.apache.org/>
I published these just now.
Warning - using the webgui the first time on ooo-site it is suggested that you brew a cup of coffee and come back in 10 minutes.
I've discussed the foo.openoffice.org/bar to www.openoffice.org/foo/bar permanent redirect for the ooo-site Virtual Host and openoffice.org DNS with Joe today - we should specify a full list of the subdomains that will fit this pattern and add it to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-3933
When the time comes to go live Infra will handle the rest of the detail.
Regards,
Dave
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
>
> "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged
> by the way its animals are treated."
> -- Mohandas Gandhi
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Native-Language Sites (was: Current Polish web
site -- pl.openoffice.org)
Posted by Louis Suárez-Potts <ls...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
On 10 November 2011 13:46, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> It is not clear to me whether the diversity in N-L pages was by design
> or simply from lack of coordination.
Intentional. My purpose in permitting the project leads in N-L (and
for that matter, all the other projects) was based on two principals:
1. pragmatic reality: I didn't have the time to inspect, police,
correct all that I envisioned being created, nor did I want to; 2. I
believed then and believe now that local autonomy allows for fastest
growth and expansion. And I was right.
That said, I did have some provisions in place. No ads, for instance,
and no offensive material; and the trademarked material could not be
altered. As well, I encouraged colour coherence, and, of course,
strongly urged parsimony when it came to creating project lists.
License had to be the same as the domain-wide licenses. (We did
grudgingly allow for some projects to differ, e.g., the Authors' group
associated with Documentation, as they strongly argued for CC
licenses. As well, the wikis we used could have been clearer as to
which licenses were permitted and what the relation of the wiki was to
the other domain projects.)
Charles and I posted suggestions at http://native-lang.openoffice.org/
(Charles was effectively appointed to front the N-L category but did
little in actually scripting the policies or imposing them.)
Just has, for example, all
> Apache pages have a similar navigational structure, as well as
> mandatory content, I think we should enforce the same for N-L pages.
> Remember, these pages represent the AOOo project, and therefore
> Apache, to visitors who may never see the main English project page.
> So we need to make sure that all of our bases are covered in on that
> page: license, how to download, ToU, mailing lists, support forums,
> etc. And this needs to be done for any entry point the user makes.
> So I think we're better off with a cookie cutter approach for the
> webpages, with specific areas for extensibility according to N-L
> needs.
I agree. The issue with the wiki on OOo is a case in point. We need to
make it very clear at the outset. There were several attempts to do
this, and we can repurpose them, I daresay.
The license and aesthetic claims for N-L projects can also be a)
repurposed and b) strengthened, if that is our desire. I think at this
point, it is. But we also have to clarify what the N-L projects are to
be about, if we wish to reconstitute them. On OOo, I designed them to
be about education, information, and local marketing; not coding,
though localization was strongly encouraged. Primarily, the N-L
projects differed from l10n, where coding and much localization was
done, in that discussions on N-L lists were in the native tongue of
the speakers. I saw this as important and as a powerful lever to open
the market. I was right.
(That said, it was always my goal and design that the N-L projects
would evolve to include more development. There were very few
developers of OOo code, and my reasoning was that by progressively
introducing OOo both as a product for users in their language, and as
a community who operates in their language, and as code they can work
with—they would take to it, either out of personal desire or for
commercial reasons, even though all code discussions had to be in
English. Again, it seemed I was not incorrect in this reasoning, but
it just took too long and I had too little support from the
contributor companies who by and large could not see the point of the
N-Ls anyway.)
But I'm not sure that Apache would be right for that kind of logistic,
where there are any number of projects operating in the native tongue
of the speaker, though where all coding discussions must be in
English.
However, I do think re-using (or just using plus updates) the extant
language for the OOo N-L projects ought to be considered.
-louis
-louis
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Native-Language Sites (was: Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org)
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Hi Rob,
On Nov 10, 2011, at 10:46 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
> <snip>
>
>> I think that the following process should be considered.
>>
>
> A few questions, to make sure I understand.
>
>> (1) Migrate each N-L site fully into the Apache SVN. They are all preserved.
>>
>
> In other words, copy the existing static HTML from the legacy OOo
> website into SVN. I assume this is hooked up to the Apache CMS as
> well and we point a subdomain to it?
This is the step we are doing now. Yes the pages will "work" in the CMS, but I am going to stop worrying about fixing these to work.
>
>> (2) Tag each site in SVN to preserve the state and make it easy to find the "initial" state. Keep a record of this tag on an N-L page.
>>
>
> If you check in the N-L site with a single commit, this would be the
> same as the revision number for the ooo-site/pl directory, for
> example. Is that correct? In that case we don't really need a tag.
The sites were not necessarily in a singular revision number, but sure we could say that certain revision numbers could be used. I just think a tag is clearer and I believe that tags are light in SVN.
>
>> (3) Remove from SVN all, or most, of the N-L site. Nothing is really deleted the whole site will always be recoverable from the tag created in (2).
>>
>
> I don't understand that step. I understand what you are saying
> technically, but I don't understand the "why". Don't we want to
> preserve the N-L site?
We do, but I don't know that we want to continue hosting huge archives of out of date material without people in the N-L taking care of the content.
>
> They might require some clean up, if there are things that are
> out-of-policy, like fund raising. But we should be able to identify
> these via Google Translates, or even by creating a dump of all
> external links.
The task is huge and beyond our current ability to provide governance. There are sites like the Dutch where the OOo language project has left a "Gone to LibreOffice sign"
>> (4) Update the www / English site - moving dev portions to the podling and writing the correct guidelines and policies for the main front.
>>
>
> OK
I am specifically talking about "projects" like ooo-site.apache.org/contributing. I recommend that rewritten pages be in markdown where possible.
>
>> (5) As Volunteers appear from a N-L the first task is to translate pages and header links in (4). Translated pages will be accessed using ACCEPT-LANG browser headers, the structure should follow.
>>
>
> So the idea is we have a set of translated N-L homepages, based on the
> default English site as a template? And these pages would load based
> on browser-based language detection. What if I wanted to explicitly
> load the French or the German page, but my browser is set to English?
> Would there be some obvious way to do this?
This would be in a dropdown or sidebar accessible from the top.
>> (6) Each N-L may continue to have a unique main page that will be accessed either at pl.openoffice.org/ redirected to www.openoffice.org/pl
>>
>
> I thought these pages were deleted from SVN per #3 above?
That is a question to decide. We may keep an edited index.html for the top level for the N-L projects that require it.
Some N-Ls have twitter feeds and other front content.
>
>> (7) Each N-L should have there own links page to go off-site to locally appropriate sites.
>>
>
> Should? Or may? Why isn't openoffice.org appropriate?
May have their own. We cannot have non-Apache fundraising on either site. This is an area that will certainly be unique.
>
>> (8) If an N-L site is doing any fundraising outside of the ASF then that must move off openoffice.org. Those pages should be linked to from the page described in (7) and they must make clear that those funds are not associated with the ASF. This is is something that the ASF requires.
>>
>
> Linking to an external site is fine, I think, even if it raises funds.
> Any external links should make it clear that they are non-Apache,
> etc. But I would not be comfortable linking specifically to a
> fundraising page.
>
> Example 1: "Try this site for some amazing Polish templates for
> Apache OpenOffice" and then the linked to site has templates as well
> as button that says "Contribute here to support the development of
> further templates".
>
> Example 2: "Click here to donate to support the translators of the
> Polish OpenOffice" and then link directly to PayPal or other page for
> collecting contributions.
>
> I think example 1 is fine, but example 2 would not. I don't think we
> want to be offering placement to links that are solely or primarily
> external fund raising links. Otherwise, I could just put in some
> links to Amazon books related to OpenOffice and have those links be
> tied to my Amazon Associates account, so I get a cut from Amazon. We
> can't have stuff like that.
This is what the (P)PMC will need to police. I agree that is not primarily fundraising, but it is the example of a case where the link must be to an external site.
>
>> (9) A N-L site might need pages that the main site or other N-L sites might not have, in that case maybe everyone needs the page, or one like it. It can be worked out.
>>
>> Obviously there would be a lot of sinew and muscles to add to this skeleton and I've not focused on related spellcheck, dictionary, ML, ..., but does this approach make sense?
>>
>
> It is not clear to me whether the diversity in N-L pages was by design
> or simply from lack of coordination. Just has, for example, all
> Apache pages have a similar navigational structure, as well as
> mandatory content, I think we should enforce the same for N-L pages.
> Remember, these pages represent the AOOo project, and therefore
> Apache, to visitors who may never see the main English project page.
> So we need to make sure that all of our bases are covered in on that
> page: license, how to download, ToU, mailing lists, support forums,
> etc. And this needs to be done for any entry point the user makes.
> So I think we're better off with a cookie cutter approach for the
> webpages, with specific areas for extensibility according to N-L
> needs.
Yes, you get the raison d'etre!
Now to wait for feedback from the rest of the world.
Best Regards,
Dave
>
> -Rob
>
>
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>>
>>>
>>> So the question I have on the Polish website is, how are we doing for
>>> users? Do we know what the download stats are for the Polish version
>>> of OOo? If it is significant, I'd assume there are many visitors to
>>> those web pages as well. Unfortunately we don't have any page count
>>> statistics for our website. So we really don't have a good sense of
>>> how much used these pages are.
>>>
>>> In any case, what I am saying is this: If it is useful and used, then
>>> we should keep it and make sure we have a communication to those users
>>> that let's them know that we always welcome their help in maintaining
>>> that website, and explain how they can get more involved.
>>>
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>>> Also note, this site has not yet been ported over to the staging site.
>>>>
>>>> And finally, I am having a few problems getting my recent changes to the
>>>> N-L page to actually "publish" so no fun link from the staging home page
>>>> yet.
>>>> <http://ooo-site.apache.org/>
>>>> --
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> MzK
>>>>
>>>> "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged
>>>> by the way its animals are treated."
>>>> -- Mohandas Gandhi
>>>>
>>
>>
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Native-Language Sites (was: Current Polish web
site -- pl.openoffice.org)
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
<snip>
> I think that the following process should be considered.
>
A few questions, to make sure I understand.
> (1) Migrate each N-L site fully into the Apache SVN. They are all preserved.
>
In other words, copy the existing static HTML from the legacy OOo
website into SVN. I assume this is hooked up to the Apache CMS as
well and we point a subdomain to it?
> (2) Tag each site in SVN to preserve the state and make it easy to find the "initial" state. Keep a record of this tag on an N-L page.
>
If you check in the N-L site with a single commit, this would be the
same as the revision number for the ooo-site/pl directory, for
example. Is that correct? In that case we don't really need a tag.
> (3) Remove from SVN all, or most, of the N-L site. Nothing is really deleted the whole site will always be recoverable from the tag created in (2).
>
I don't understand that step. I understand what you are saying
technically, but I don't understand the "why". Don't we want to
preserve the N-L site?
They might require some clean up, if there are things that are
out-of-policy, like fund raising. But we should be able to identify
these via Google Translates, or even by creating a dump of all
external links.
> (4) Update the www / English site - moving dev portions to the podling and writing the correct guidelines and policies for the main front.
>
OK
> (5) As Volunteers appear from a N-L the first task is to translate pages and header links in (4). Translated pages will be accessed using ACCEPT-LANG browser headers, the structure should follow.
>
So the idea is we have a set of translated N-L homepages, based on the
default English site as a template? And these pages would load based
on browser-based language detection. What if I wanted to explicitly
load the French or the German page, but my browser is set to English?
Would there be some obvious way to do this?
> (6) Each N-L may continue to have a unique main page that will be accessed either at pl.openoffice.org/ redirected to www.openoffice.org/pl
>
I thought these pages were deleted from SVN per #3 above?
> (7) Each N-L should have there own links page to go off-site to locally appropriate sites.
>
Should? Or may? Why isn't openoffice.org appropriate?
> (8) If an N-L site is doing any fundraising outside of the ASF then that must move off openoffice.org. Those pages should be linked to from the page described in (7) and they must make clear that those funds are not associated with the ASF. This is is something that the ASF requires.
>
Linking to an external site is fine, I think, even if it raises funds.
Any external links should make it clear that they are non-Apache,
etc. But I would not be comfortable linking specifically to a
fundraising page.
Example 1: "Try this site for some amazing Polish templates for
Apache OpenOffice" and then the linked to site has templates as well
as button that says "Contribute here to support the development of
further templates".
Example 2: "Click here to donate to support the translators of the
Polish OpenOffice" and then link directly to PayPal or other page for
collecting contributions.
I think example 1 is fine, but example 2 would not. I don't think we
want to be offering placement to links that are solely or primarily
external fund raising links. Otherwise, I could just put in some
links to Amazon books related to OpenOffice and have those links be
tied to my Amazon Associates account, so I get a cut from Amazon. We
can't have stuff like that.
> (9) A N-L site might need pages that the main site or other N-L sites might not have, in that case maybe everyone needs the page, or one like it. It can be worked out.
>
> Obviously there would be a lot of sinew and muscles to add to this skeleton and I've not focused on related spellcheck, dictionary, ML, ..., but does this approach make sense?
>
It is not clear to me whether the diversity in N-L pages was by design
or simply from lack of coordination. Just has, for example, all
Apache pages have a similar navigational structure, as well as
mandatory content, I think we should enforce the same for N-L pages.
Remember, these pages represent the AOOo project, and therefore
Apache, to visitors who may never see the main English project page.
So we need to make sure that all of our bases are covered in on that
page: license, how to download, ToU, mailing lists, support forums,
etc. And this needs to be done for any entry point the user makes.
So I think we're better off with a cookie cutter approach for the
webpages, with specific areas for extensibility according to N-L
needs.
-Rob
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>>
>> So the question I have on the Polish website is, how are we doing for
>> users? Do we know what the download stats are for the Polish version
>> of OOo? If it is significant, I'd assume there are many visitors to
>> those web pages as well. Unfortunately we don't have any page count
>> statistics for our website. So we really don't have a good sense of
>> how much used these pages are.
>>
>> In any case, what I am saying is this: If it is useful and used, then
>> we should keep it and make sure we have a communication to those users
>> that let's them know that we always welcome their help in maintaining
>> that website, and explain how they can get more involved.
>>
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>> Also note, this site has not yet been ported over to the staging site.
>>>
>>> And finally, I am having a few problems getting my recent changes to the
>>> N-L page to actually "publish" so no fun link from the staging home page
>>> yet.
>>> <http://ooo-site.apache.org/>
>>> --
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> MzK
>>>
>>> "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged
>>> by the way its animals are treated."
>>> -- Mohandas Gandhi
>>>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Native-Language Sites (was: Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org)
Posted by Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com>.
On Nov 10, 2011, at 10:13 AM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> On Nov 10, 2011, at 9:06 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 5:19 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> As many of you may know, per Dave's announcement about a week or so ago, we
>>> have a staging site of *MOST* (we're still finding areas that need to be
>>> "re-pulled" for one reason or another), of the (old) current OO.o site at:
>>>
>>> http://ooo-site.apache.org
>>>
>>> Right now, I have a question about the existing "pl" (Polish) site at
>>>
>>> http://pl.openoffice.org/
>>>
>>> Does anyone on this list know anything about the history of the Polish site
>>> -- why this group decided to basically make a duplicate of the
>>> OpenOffice.org site but translated? None of the other N-L sites have gone
>>> to this length so I'm just curious about it.
>>>
>>> Also, at this point in our migration plans, do we have anyone here who is
>>> willing to continue to maintain the "pl" site as it stands?
>>>
>>
>> My general philosophy on this:
>>
>> 1) If there is something useful then it will have users. Users are at
>> the base of the pyramid of a project. If you have many users, then
>> you are healthy.
>>
>> 2) Of the users, a percentage of them will get a little more involve
>> and submit a defect report or maybe even a small patch or other wise
>> get involved a little more. They are the contributors to the project.
>> If they have a good experience with their initial contributions and
>> interactions with the community, then they may do more.
>>
>> 3) And of the contributors there is a percentage that will get fully
>> involved, sign the iCLA, become committers, and work more actively on
>> code, website, documentation, etc.
>>
>> So anything we do to encourage more users, and to make it easy for the
>> users to become contributors will help us have more committers in the
>> future.
>>
>> Does this make sense?
>
> Yes! We need to assure that what is done with the N-L sites invites those users into the project.
>
> At the same time there are minimum rules about fundraising and licenses that are very different from OpenOffice.org. How do we handle this without understanding the language?
>
> The Native Language (N-L) issue is, as Rob points out, more about the whole project and not the N-L sites.
>
> I think that the following process should be considered.
>
> (1) Migrate each N-L site fully into the Apache SVN. They are all preserved.
>
> (2) Tag each site in SVN to preserve the state and make it easy to find the "initial" state. Keep a record of this tag on an N-L page.
>
> (3) Remove from SVN all, or most, of the N-L site. Nothing is really deleted the whole site will always be recoverable from the tag created in (2).
>
> (4) Update the www / English site - moving dev portions to the podling and writing the correct guidelines and policies for the main front.
>
> (5) As Volunteers appear from a N-L the first task is to translate pages and header links in (4). Translated pages will be accessed using ACCEPT-LANG browser headers, the structure should follow.
>
> (6) Each N-L may continue to have a unique main page that will be accessed either at pl.openoffice.org/ redirected to www.openoffice.org/pl
>
> (7) Each N-L should have there own links page to go off-site to locally appropriate sites.
>
> (8) If an N-L site is doing any fundraising outside of the ASF then that must move off openoffice.org. Those pages should be linked to from the page described in (7) and they must make clear that those funds are not associated with the ASF. This is is something that the ASF requires.
>
> (9) A N-L site might need pages that the main site or other N-L sites might not have, in that case maybe everyone needs the page, or one like it. It can be worked out.
>
+1
Sounds like a very good plan
As we document this it will also create a very clear process for integrating new languages. Also, clear boundaries on linking to external resources will help clean up the current situation, identifying what should be inside the Apache OpenOffice effort, and how to interface to activities occurring outside.
> Obviously there would be a lot of sinew and muscles to add to this skeleton and I've not focused on related spellcheck, dictionary, ML, ..., but does this approach make sense?
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>>
>> So the question I have on the Polish website is, how are we doing for
>> users? Do we know what the download stats are for the Polish version
>> of OOo? If it is significant, I'd assume there are many visitors to
>> those web pages as well. Unfortunately we don't have any page count
>> statistics for our website. So we really don't have a good sense of
>> how much used these pages are.
>>
>> In any case, what I am saying is this: If it is useful and used, then
>> we should keep it and make sure we have a communication to those users
>> that let's them know that we always welcome their help in maintaining
>> that website, and explain how they can get more involved.
>>
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>> Also note, this site has not yet been ported over to the staging site.
>>>
>>> And finally, I am having a few problems getting my recent changes to the
>>> N-L page to actually "publish" so no fun link from the staging home page
>>> yet.
>>> <http://ooo-site.apache.org/>
>>> --
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> MzK
>>>
>>> "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged
>>> by the way its animals are treated."
>>> -- Mohandas Gandhi
>>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Native-Language Sites (was: Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org)
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Nov 10, 2011, at 9:06 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 5:19 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> As many of you may know, per Dave's announcement about a week or so ago, we
>> have a staging site of *MOST* (we're still finding areas that need to be
>> "re-pulled" for one reason or another), of the (old) current OO.o site at:
>>
>> http://ooo-site.apache.org
>>
>> Right now, I have a question about the existing "pl" (Polish) site at
>>
>> http://pl.openoffice.org/
>>
>> Does anyone on this list know anything about the history of the Polish site
>> -- why this group decided to basically make a duplicate of the
>> OpenOffice.org site but translated? None of the other N-L sites have gone
>> to this length so I'm just curious about it.
>>
>> Also, at this point in our migration plans, do we have anyone here who is
>> willing to continue to maintain the "pl" site as it stands?
>>
>
> My general philosophy on this:
>
> 1) If there is something useful then it will have users. Users are at
> the base of the pyramid of a project. If you have many users, then
> you are healthy.
>
> 2) Of the users, a percentage of them will get a little more involve
> and submit a defect report or maybe even a small patch or other wise
> get involved a little more. They are the contributors to the project.
> If they have a good experience with their initial contributions and
> interactions with the community, then they may do more.
>
> 3) And of the contributors there is a percentage that will get fully
> involved, sign the iCLA, become committers, and work more actively on
> code, website, documentation, etc.
>
> So anything we do to encourage more users, and to make it easy for the
> users to become contributors will help us have more committers in the
> future.
>
> Does this make sense?
Yes! We need to assure that what is done with the N-L sites invites those users into the project.
At the same time there are minimum rules about fundraising and licenses that are very different from OpenOffice.org. How do we handle this without understanding the language?
The Native Language (N-L) issue is, as Rob points out, more about the whole project and not the N-L sites.
I think that the following process should be considered.
(1) Migrate each N-L site fully into the Apache SVN. They are all preserved.
(2) Tag each site in SVN to preserve the state and make it easy to find the "initial" state. Keep a record of this tag on an N-L page.
(3) Remove from SVN all, or most, of the N-L site. Nothing is really deleted the whole site will always be recoverable from the tag created in (2).
(4) Update the www / English site - moving dev portions to the podling and writing the correct guidelines and policies for the main front.
(5) As Volunteers appear from a N-L the first task is to translate pages and header links in (4). Translated pages will be accessed using ACCEPT-LANG browser headers, the structure should follow.
(6) Each N-L may continue to have a unique main page that will be accessed either at pl.openoffice.org/ redirected to www.openoffice.org/pl
(7) Each N-L should have there own links page to go off-site to locally appropriate sites.
(8) If an N-L site is doing any fundraising outside of the ASF then that must move off openoffice.org. Those pages should be linked to from the page described in (7) and they must make clear that those funds are not associated with the ASF. This is is something that the ASF requires.
(9) A N-L site might need pages that the main site or other N-L sites might not have, in that case maybe everyone needs the page, or one like it. It can be worked out.
Obviously there would be a lot of sinew and muscles to add to this skeleton and I've not focused on related spellcheck, dictionary, ML, ..., but does this approach make sense?
Regards,
Dave
>
> So the question I have on the Polish website is, how are we doing for
> users? Do we know what the download stats are for the Polish version
> of OOo? If it is significant, I'd assume there are many visitors to
> those web pages as well. Unfortunately we don't have any page count
> statistics for our website. So we really don't have a good sense of
> how much used these pages are.
>
> In any case, what I am saying is this: If it is useful and used, then
> we should keep it and make sure we have a communication to those users
> that let's them know that we always welcome their help in maintaining
> that website, and explain how they can get more involved.
>
>
> -Rob
>
>> Also note, this site has not yet been ported over to the staging site.
>>
>> And finally, I am having a few problems getting my recent changes to the
>> N-L page to actually "publish" so no fun link from the staging home page
>> yet.
>> <http://ooo-site.apache.org/>
>> --
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> MzK
>>
>> "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged
>> by the way its animals are treated."
>> -- Mohandas Gandhi
>>
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 5:19 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As many of you may know, per Dave's announcement about a week or so ago, we
> have a staging site of *MOST* (we're still finding areas that need to be
> "re-pulled" for one reason or another), of the (old) current OO.o site at:
>
> http://ooo-site.apache.org
>
> Right now, I have a question about the existing "pl" (Polish) site at
>
> http://pl.openoffice.org/
>
> Does anyone on this list know anything about the history of the Polish site
> -- why this group decided to basically make a duplicate of the
> OpenOffice.org site but translated? None of the other N-L sites have gone
> to this length so I'm just curious about it.
>
> Also, at this point in our migration plans, do we have anyone here who is
> willing to continue to maintain the "pl" site as it stands?
>
My general philosophy on this:
1) If there is something useful then it will have users. Users are at
the base of the pyramid of a project. If you have many users, then
you are healthy.
2) Of the users, a percentage of them will get a little more involve
and submit a defect report or maybe even a small patch or other wise
get involved a little more. They are the contributors to the project.
If they have a good experience with their initial contributions and
interactions with the community, then they may do more.
3) And of the contributors there is a percentage that will get fully
involved, sign the iCLA, become committers, and work more actively on
code, website, documentation, etc.
So anything we do to encourage more users, and to make it easy for the
users to become contributors will help us have more committers in the
future.
Does this make sense?
So the question I have on the Polish website is, how are we doing for
users? Do we know what the download stats are for the Polish version
of OOo? If it is significant, I'd assume there are many visitors to
those web pages as well. Unfortunately we don't have any page count
statistics for our website. So we really don't have a good sense of
how much used these pages are.
In any case, what I am saying is this: If it is useful and used, then
we should keep it and make sure we have a communication to those users
that let's them know that we always welcome their help in maintaining
that website, and explain how they can get more involved.
-Rob
> Also note, this site has not yet been ported over to the staging site.
>
> And finally, I am having a few problems getting my recent changes to the
> N-L page to actually "publish" so no fun link from the staging home page
> yet.
> <http://ooo-site.apache.org/>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
>
> "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged
> by the way its animals are treated."
> -- Mohandas Gandhi
>