You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com> on 2012/06/23 11:58:29 UTC
Must use the incubating qualifier
It has been pointed out on the general list that AOO is not always using
the incubating qualifier. For example recent blog posts don't include it.
Let's not forget it please.
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
RE: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
Yes, I think the description for use of the "Get it Here" image and button is clear.
Thanks Rob,
I also strongly agree that it leads to a download page and does not initiate a download directly.
I am disagreeing with those who think the button should initiate download.
It is important to find a page that describes what the artifact is, how to know more about it, how to install it, etc., preferably in at least the language used on the image itself, and for that language and possibly others.
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2012 14:38
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Ross Gardler
<rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
> The way to deal with these things is acknowledge the need to use the
> qualifier. Where there is a reasonable argument (blog titles on the ASF
> home page for example) undertake to improve things and move on.
>
I updated the last couple of blog posts, to add the incubation
disclaimer, the link to the podling website, or both.
https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache
https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/porting_apache_openoffice_to_solaris
-Rob
[ ... ]
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Ross Gardler
<rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
> The way to deal with these things is acknowledge the need to use the
> qualifier. Where there is a reasonable argument (blog titles on the ASF
> home page for example) undertake to improve things and move on.
>
I updated the last couple of blog posts, to add the incubation
disclaimer, the link to the podling website, or both.
https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache
https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/porting_apache_openoffice_to_solaris
-Rob
> These things come up occasionally when an interested IPMC member does a
> review and sees things the rest of us missed. I brought it here in the hope
> of preventing an IPMC mega-thread. Acknowledge it there, deal with it here.
>
> If it helps, I'm not worried about the logo thing, but that might be just
> me.
>
> Ross
>
> On Saturday, 23 June 2012, Dennis E. Hamilton
> <de...@acm.org>
> @ <de...@acm.org>acm.org <de...@acm.org>> wrote:
>> I think it would be good and wait until the original reporter identifies
> what the specific infraction is and what its cure is. One part of the
> complaint is how AOOi is mentioned in tweets by @TheASF. Those are not, as
> far as I am aware, anything under our control whatsoever.
>>
>> I would not dispense with full atom feeds.
>>
>> Having "(incubating)" used at the beginning of a post, even with a link
> to what that entails, could be useful. Whether it needs to be in the title
> or not remains to be seen.
>>
>> Of course, whatever the practice is asserted to be, it will need to be
> honored by all incubating projects, of course.
>>
>> - Dennis
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir <ro...@apache.org>@ <ro...@apache.org>
> apache.org <ro...@apache.org>]
>> Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2012 08:40
>> To: ooo-dev@ <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:53 AM, drew jensen <dr...@gmail.com>
> @ <dr...@gmail.com>gmail.com <dr...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 09:51 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:48 AM, drew <drew@ <dr...@baseanswers.com>
> baseanswers.com <dr...@baseanswers.com>> wrote:
>>>> > On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 08:52 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>> >> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
> @ <ro...@apache.org>apache.org <ro...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>> >> > On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Ross Gardler
>>>> >> > <rgardler <rg...@opendirective.com>
> opendirective.com <rg...@opendirective.com>> wrote:
>>>> >> >> It has been pointed out on the general list that AOO is not
> always using
>>>> >> >> the incubating qualifier. For example recent blog posts don't
> include it.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > It is right there, first thing on the page, in a very large font,
> for
>>>> >> > every blog post: "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)"
>>>> >> >
>>>> >>
>>>> >> E.g, : https://<https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache>
> blogs.apache.org<https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache>
> /OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache<https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Note the <title> of the page says "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)".
>>>> >> Ditto for the largest (and first) header on the page.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Looking at the general list, it sounds like NIck's issue was that
> blog
>>>> >> aggregators, such as used by Apache for generating content on the
> home
>>>> >> page are not picking up on this.
>>>> >
>>>> > Hi,
>>>> >
>>>> > Maybe, I just read the incubator list also I think Nick is saying that
>>>> > _any_ time the phrase Apache OpenOffice is used it must have the word
>>>> > incubating included, not just in the title.
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> But that's not the policy. The policy is that it must be called out
>>>> as incubating at first mention in the document.
>>>
>>> That's what I thought also - I'm saying how it reads to me, that's all.
>>>
>>
>> Maybe the key is to realize that when we publish a blog post, we
>> publish two things:
>>
>> 1) A web page, which does IMHO have the correct incubation notices on it.
>>
>> 2) An Atom feed that will be used by websites and services outside of
>> our immediate control, and which will not bring along the full page
>> context from the blog.
>>
>> On the second one, I think the remedy might be get the incubation
>> notice into the post ("entry") titles. It may be possible to do this
>> automatically (per my previous post), but it could be done manually as
>> well.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>>>
>>>> -Rob
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> > //drew
>>>> >
>>>> > <snip>
>>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
<de...@acm.org> wrote:
> OK, personal impression only:
>
> I find the rainbow coloring through the text of "Get it Here" to be distracting and not helpful. I know some subset of us know what the colors represent, but I see no need to be cute about it. (Yes, this will be on the final exam.)
>
The trick is finding something that is clearly different than the
official project logo, but also clearly related. So a family
resemblance, but not a twin.
Drew's latest update is here:
http://lo-portal.us/aoo/temp/get-aoo-300x100-icv.png
That is fine with me. It is not like we are baking it into a product
UI or anything. We can evolve this from release to release if we want
to try other things. Ideally there would be some thematic link
between the "Get it here" logo and any CD artwork we want to promote
for redistributors.
> I also hope that we might provide a specimen <a><image /></a> that provides alternative texts that are useful for screen readers, text-to-voice, etc., and other accessibility-oriented purposes. I suppose it will be tagged as English, since "Get it Here" is.
>
Something like the quoted HTML here:
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/get-it-here.html ???
The alt text there is "Download Apache OpenOffice here". I suppose we
could add "(incubating)" there as well.
> I'm abstaining on this: Drew provides significant effort here, and I recognize that. I am providing my impressions FWIW.
>
> - Dennis
>
> PS: Perhaps others can suggest translations for use on non-English sites. The URL might then need to change as well.
>
Take a look at this page if you haven't already. I tried to
anticipate the translation questions. Let me know if it is not clear
there. http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/get-it-here.html
Regards,
-Rob
> -----Original Message-----
> From: drew [mailto:drew@baseanswers.com]
> Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2012 13:57
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
>
> On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 21:51 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote:
>> The way to deal with these things is acknowledge the need to use the
>> qualifier. Where there is a reasonable argument (blog titles on the ASF
>> home page for example) undertake to improve things and move on.
>>
>> These things come up occasionally when an interested IPMC member does a
>> review and sees things the rest of us missed. I brought it here in the hope
>> of preventing an IPMC mega-thread. Acknowledge it there, deal with it here.
>>
>> If it helps, I'm not worried about the logo thing, but that might be just
>> me.
>>
>
> Hi Ross, others,
>
> I'm not worried about the logo thing either per se, then again tradition
> is worth something isn't it.
>
> Anyway - here is one quick proposal for a logo change:
>
> http://lo-portal.us/aoo/temp/get-aoo-300x100-icv.png
>
> Let me know what folks,
>
> //drew
>
>>
>> On Saturday, 23 June 2012, Dennis E. Hamilton
>> <de...@acm.org>
>> @ <de...@acm.org>acm.org <de...@acm.org>> wrote:
>> > I think it would be good and wait until the original reporter identifies
>> what the specific infraction is and what its cure is. One part of the
>> complaint is how AOOi is mentioned in tweets by @TheASF. Those are not, as
>> far as I am aware, anything under our control whatsoever.
>> >
>> > I would not dispense with full atom feeds.
>> >
>> > Having "(incubating)" used at the beginning of a post, even with a link
>> to what that entails, could be useful. Whether it needs to be in the title
>> or not remains to be seen.
>> >
>> > Of course, whatever the practice is asserted to be, it will need to be
>> honored by all incubating projects, of course.
>> >
>> > - Dennis
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir <ro...@apache.org>@ <ro...@apache.org>
>> apache.org <ro...@apache.org>]
>> > Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2012 08:40
>> > To: ooo-dev@ <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>> > Subject: Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
>> >
>> > On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:53 AM, drew jensen <dr...@gmail.com>
>> @ <dr...@gmail.com>gmail.com <dr...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >> On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 09:51 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> >>> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:48 AM, drew <drew@ <dr...@baseanswers.com>
>> baseanswers.com <dr...@baseanswers.com>> wrote:
>> >>> > On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 08:52 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> >>> >> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>> @ <ro...@apache.org>apache.org <ro...@apache.org>> wrote:
>> >>> >> > On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Ross Gardler
>> >>> >> > <rgardler <rg...@opendirective.com>
>> opendirective.com <rg...@opendirective.com>> wrote:
>> >>> >> >> It has been pointed out on the general list that AOO is not
>> always using
>> >>> >> >> the incubating qualifier. For example recent blog posts don't
>> include it.
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> > It is right there, first thing on the page, in a very large font,
>> for
>> >>> >> > every blog post: "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)"
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> E.g, : https://<https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache>
>> blogs.apache.org<https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache>
>> /OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache<https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Note the <title> of the page says "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)".
>> >>> >> Ditto for the largest (and first) header on the page.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Looking at the general list, it sounds like NIck's issue was that
>> blog
>> >>> >> aggregators, such as used by Apache for generating content on the
>> home
>> >>> >> page are not picking up on this.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Hi,
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Maybe, I just read the incubator list also I think Nick is saying that
>> >>> > _any_ time the phrase Apache OpenOffice is used it must have the word
>> >>> > incubating included, not just in the title.
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> >>> But that's not the policy. The policy is that it must be called out
>> >>> as incubating at first mention in the document.
>> >>
>> >> That's what I thought also - I'm saying how it reads to me, that's all.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Maybe the key is to realize that when we publish a blog post, we
>> > publish two things:
>> >
>> > 1) A web page, which does IMHO have the correct incubation notices on it.
>> >
>> > 2) An Atom feed that will be used by websites and services outside of
>> > our immediate control, and which will not bring along the full page
>> > context from the blog.
>> >
>> > On the second one, I think the remedy might be get the incubation
>> > notice into the post ("entry") titles. It may be possible to do this
>> > automatically (per my previous post), but it could be done manually as
>> > well.
>> >
>> > -Rob
>> >
>> >>>
>> >>> -Rob
>> >>>
>> >>> >
>> >>> > //drew
>> >>> >
>> >>> > <snip>
>> >>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>
>
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by Rory O'Farrell <of...@iol.ie>.
On Sun, 24 Jun 2012 10:58:48 +0200
Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
> David McKay wrote:
> > On 24/06/12 00:05, drew wrote:
> >> here it is with text a little smaller and a bevel:
> >> http://lo-portal.us/aoo/temp/get-aoo-300x100-btn.png
>
> It's nice. I especially like that the incubator logo is included there
> (since we are forced to refer to the incubating state everywhere) but is
> unobtrusive. (For the same reasons, I find also nice the solution Rob
> adopted for blog posts).
>
> > That does look better. Personally I'd still prefer something that
> > reflects what will happen when you click it. Something along the lines
> > of 'Click for download page'.
>
> To an international audience "Download" will be more understandable than
> "Get it here". And the fact that the button takes you to a download page
> instead of serving immediately a file is quite irrelevant: users won't
> be confused, and the extra click is a really minor annoyance.
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
>
One could say "Link to Download site" or "Download Site"
--
Rory O'Farrell <of...@iol.ie>
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
David McKay wrote:
> On 24/06/12 00:05, drew wrote:
>> here it is with text a little smaller and a bevel:
>> http://lo-portal.us/aoo/temp/get-aoo-300x100-btn.png
It's nice. I especially like that the incubator logo is included there
(since we are forced to refer to the incubating state everywhere) but is
unobtrusive. (For the same reasons, I find also nice the solution Rob
adopted for blog posts).
> That does look better. Personally I'd still prefer something that
> reflects what will happen when you click it. Something along the lines
> of 'Click for download page'.
To an international audience "Download" will be more understandable than
"Get it here". And the fact that the button takes you to a download page
instead of serving immediately a file is quite irrelevant: users won't
be confused, and the extra click is a really minor annoyance.
Regards,
Andrea.
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by David McKay <dm...@btconnect.com>.
On 24/06/12 00:05, drew wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 18:08 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 5:57 PM, RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2012/6/23 David McKay <dm...@btconnect.com>:
>>>> On 23/06/12 22:19, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>>>>> OK, personal impression only:
>>>>>
>>>>> I find the rainbow coloring through the text of "Get it Here" to be
>>>>> distracting and not helpful. I know some subset of us know what the colors
>>>>> represent, but I see no need to be cute about it. (Yes, this will be on the
>>>>> final exam.)
>>>> I'm not too sure about the wording 'Get it here'. To me that isn't as simple
>>>> and clear as something like 'Click to Download'.
>>>>
>>>> Might just be the way my brain is wired up, but it says to me 'you can get
>>>> it here on this web page somewhere', whereas something that specifically
>>>> says 'This is the link/image/gizmo you need to click on to kick off the
>>>> download' is evidently the bit you need to click on.
>>>>
>>>> Dave.
>>> It seems our brains are wired on similar ways because I agree with
>>> you: "Click to download" or "Click here to download" is far better,
>>> IMO.
>>>
>> Ah, but the link doesn't actually download anything. It takes you to
>> the OpenOffice download page, where you would need another click or
>> two to download. The only way we could trigger a direct download from
>> a 3rd party website would be if they included the Javascript on their
>> site needed to determine platform and language and resolve the
>> download file name. And that might not work cross-site.
>>
>> So it really is "get it here" or at best "click here to learn more" or
>> something like that.
>>
>> Maybe beveled edges or something would make it look more "button-like"
>> so it was clearer that the user is supposed to click it?
> Maybe - here it is with text a little smaller and a bevel:
> http://lo-portal.us/aoo/temp/get-aoo-300x100-btn.png
That does look better. Personally I'd still prefer something that
reflects what will happen when you click it. Something along the lines
of 'Click for download page'.
>
> //drew
>
>>> Ricardo
>
>
>
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 10:10 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 2012-07-01 at 13:07 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 12:43 PM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2012-07-01 at 08:33 -0700, Kay Schenk wrote:
> > >> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 7:05 PM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> > >> > > On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 18:08 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > <snip>
> > >> >
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> Maybe beveled edges or something would make it look more
> "button-like"
> > >> > >> so it was clearer that the user is supposed to click it?
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Maybe - here it is with text a little smaller and a bevel:
> > >> > > http://lo-portal.us/aoo/temp/get-aoo-300x100-btn.png
> > >> > >
> > >> > > //drew
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> > So... 3 days have passed. Drew, do you want to check that into SVN.
> > >> > Or I can do that, assuming this is a contribution from you?
> > >> >
> > >> > It would replace this file:
> > >> >
> > >> >
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/site/trunk/content/openofficeorg/images/get-it-here/en.png
> > >> >
> > >> > -Rob
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> So, no replacement yet? Just checking...
> > >>
> > > OHH - ok, I have to admit this - I never registered keys for the SVN
> > > system apparently - I've just been lazy
> > > - if anyone would just check that in I would appreciate it..
> > >
> >
> > Done: http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/get-it-here.html
> >
> > -Rob
>
> Thank you
>
looks good!
>
> >
> > > otherwise - I'll waddle over and finish getting setup..
> > >
> > > //drew
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"I would rather have a donkey that takes me there
than a horse that will not fare."
-- Portuguese proverb
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Sun, 2012-07-01 at 13:07 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 12:43 PM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> > On Sun, 2012-07-01 at 08:33 -0700, Kay Schenk wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 7:05 PM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> >> > > On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 18:08 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> >> >
> >> > <snip>
> >> >
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Maybe beveled edges or something would make it look more "button-like"
> >> > >> so it was clearer that the user is supposed to click it?
> >> > >
> >> > > Maybe - here it is with text a little smaller and a bevel:
> >> > > http://lo-portal.us/aoo/temp/get-aoo-300x100-btn.png
> >> > >
> >> > > //drew
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > So... 3 days have passed. Drew, do you want to check that into SVN.
> >> > Or I can do that, assuming this is a contribution from you?
> >> >
> >> > It would replace this file:
> >> >
> >> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/site/trunk/content/openofficeorg/images/get-it-here/en.png
> >> >
> >> > -Rob
> >> >
> >>
> >> So, no replacement yet? Just checking...
> >>
> > OHH - ok, I have to admit this - I never registered keys for the SVN
> > system apparently - I've just been lazy
> > - if anyone would just check that in I would appreciate it..
> >
>
> Done: http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/get-it-here.html
>
> -Rob
Thank you
>
> > otherwise - I'll waddle over and finish getting setup..
> >
> > //drew
> >>
> >
> >
>
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 12:43 PM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 2012-07-01 at 08:33 -0700, Kay Schenk wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 7:05 PM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>> > > On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 18:08 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> >
>> > <snip>
>> >
>> > >>
>> > >> Maybe beveled edges or something would make it look more "button-like"
>> > >> so it was clearer that the user is supposed to click it?
>> > >
>> > > Maybe - here it is with text a little smaller and a bevel:
>> > > http://lo-portal.us/aoo/temp/get-aoo-300x100-btn.png
>> > >
>> > > //drew
>> > >
>> >
>> > So... 3 days have passed. Drew, do you want to check that into SVN.
>> > Or I can do that, assuming this is a contribution from you?
>> >
>> > It would replace this file:
>> >
>> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/site/trunk/content/openofficeorg/images/get-it-here/en.png
>> >
>> > -Rob
>> >
>>
>> So, no replacement yet? Just checking...
>>
> OHH - ok, I have to admit this - I never registered keys for the SVN
> system apparently - I've just been lazy
> - if anyone would just check that in I would appreciate it..
>
Done: http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/get-it-here.html
-Rob
> otherwise - I'll waddle over and finish getting setup..
>
> //drew
>>
>
>
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Sun, 2012-07-01 at 08:33 -0700, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 7:05 PM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 18:08 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > >>
> > >> Maybe beveled edges or something would make it look more "button-like"
> > >> so it was clearer that the user is supposed to click it?
> > >
> > > Maybe - here it is with text a little smaller and a bevel:
> > > http://lo-portal.us/aoo/temp/get-aoo-300x100-btn.png
> > >
> > > //drew
> > >
> >
> > So... 3 days have passed. Drew, do you want to check that into SVN.
> > Or I can do that, assuming this is a contribution from you?
> >
> > It would replace this file:
> >
> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/site/trunk/content/openofficeorg/images/get-it-here/en.png
> >
> > -Rob
> >
>
> So, no replacement yet? Just checking...
>
OHH - ok, I have to admit this - I never registered keys for the SVN
system apparently - I've just been lazy
- if anyone would just check that in I would appreciate it..
otherwise - I'll waddle over and finish getting setup..
//drew
>
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 7:05 PM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 18:08 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >>
> >> Maybe beveled edges or something would make it look more "button-like"
> >> so it was clearer that the user is supposed to click it?
> >
> > Maybe - here it is with text a little smaller and a bevel:
> > http://lo-portal.us/aoo/temp/get-aoo-300x100-btn.png
> >
> > //drew
> >
>
> So... 3 days have passed. Drew, do you want to check that into SVN.
> Or I can do that, assuming this is a contribution from you?
>
> It would replace this file:
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/site/trunk/content/openofficeorg/images/get-it-here/en.png
>
> -Rob
>
So, no replacement yet? Just checking...
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"I would rather have a donkey that takes me there
than a horse that will not fare."
-- Portuguese proverb
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 7:05 PM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 18:08 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
<snip>
>>
>> Maybe beveled edges or something would make it look more "button-like"
>> so it was clearer that the user is supposed to click it?
>
> Maybe - here it is with text a little smaller and a bevel:
> http://lo-portal.us/aoo/temp/get-aoo-300x100-btn.png
>
> //drew
>
So... 3 days have passed. Drew, do you want to check that into SVN.
Or I can do that, assuming this is a contribution from you?
It would replace this file:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/site/trunk/content/openofficeorg/images/get-it-here/en.png
-Rob
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 18:08 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 5:57 PM, RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2012/6/23 David McKay <dm...@btconnect.com>:
> >>
> >> On 23/06/12 22:19, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> >>>
> >>> OK, personal impression only:
> >>>
> >>> I find the rainbow coloring through the text of "Get it Here" to be
> >>> distracting and not helpful. I know some subset of us know what the colors
> >>> represent, but I see no need to be cute about it. (Yes, this will be on the
> >>> final exam.)
> >>
> >> I'm not too sure about the wording 'Get it here'. To me that isn't as simple
> >> and clear as something like 'Click to Download'.
> >>
> >> Might just be the way my brain is wired up, but it says to me 'you can get
> >> it here on this web page somewhere', whereas something that specifically
> >> says 'This is the link/image/gizmo you need to click on to kick off the
> >> download' is evidently the bit you need to click on.
> >>
> >> Dave.
> >
> > It seems our brains are wired on similar ways because I agree with
> > you: "Click to download" or "Click here to download" is far better,
> > IMO.
> >
>
> Ah, but the link doesn't actually download anything. It takes you to
> the OpenOffice download page, where you would need another click or
> two to download. The only way we could trigger a direct download from
> a 3rd party website would be if they included the Javascript on their
> site needed to determine platform and language and resolve the
> download file name. And that might not work cross-site.
>
> So it really is "get it here" or at best "click here to learn more" or
> something like that.
>
> Maybe beveled edges or something would make it look more "button-like"
> so it was clearer that the user is supposed to click it?
Maybe - here it is with text a little smaller and a bevel:
http://lo-portal.us/aoo/temp/get-aoo-300x100-btn.png
//drew
>
> > Ricardo
>
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 5:57 PM, RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2012/6/23 David McKay <dm...@btconnect.com>:
>>
>> On 23/06/12 22:19, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>>>
>>> OK, personal impression only:
>>>
>>> I find the rainbow coloring through the text of "Get it Here" to be
>>> distracting and not helpful. I know some subset of us know what the colors
>>> represent, but I see no need to be cute about it. (Yes, this will be on the
>>> final exam.)
>>
>> I'm not too sure about the wording 'Get it here'. To me that isn't as simple
>> and clear as something like 'Click to Download'.
>>
>> Might just be the way my brain is wired up, but it says to me 'you can get
>> it here on this web page somewhere', whereas something that specifically
>> says 'This is the link/image/gizmo you need to click on to kick off the
>> download' is evidently the bit you need to click on.
>>
>> Dave.
>
> It seems our brains are wired on similar ways because I agree with
> you: "Click to download" or "Click here to download" is far better,
> IMO.
>
Ah, but the link doesn't actually download anything. It takes you to
the OpenOffice download page, where you would need another click or
two to download. The only way we could trigger a direct download from
a 3rd party website would be if they included the Javascript on their
site needed to determine platform and language and resolve the
download file name. And that might not work cross-site.
So it really is "get it here" or at best "click here to learn more" or
something like that.
Maybe beveled edges or something would make it look more "button-like"
so it was clearer that the user is supposed to click it?
> Ricardo
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com>.
2012/6/23 David McKay <dm...@btconnect.com>:
>
> On 23/06/12 22:19, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>>
>> OK, personal impression only:
>>
>> I find the rainbow coloring through the text of "Get it Here" to be
>> distracting and not helpful. I know some subset of us know what the colors
>> represent, but I see no need to be cute about it. (Yes, this will be on the
>> final exam.)
>
> I'm not too sure about the wording 'Get it here'. To me that isn't as simple
> and clear as something like 'Click to Download'.
>
> Might just be the way my brain is wired up, but it says to me 'you can get
> it here on this web page somewhere', whereas something that specifically
> says 'This is the link/image/gizmo you need to click on to kick off the
> download' is evidently the bit you need to click on.
>
> Dave.
It seems our brains are wired on similar ways because I agree with
you: "Click to download" or "Click here to download" is far better,
IMO.
Ricardo
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by David McKay <dm...@btconnect.com>.
On 23/06/12 22:19, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> OK, personal impression only:
>
> I find the rainbow coloring through the text of "Get it Here" to be distracting and not helpful. I know some subset of us know what the colors represent, but I see no need to be cute about it. (Yes, this will be on the final exam.)
I'm not too sure about the wording 'Get it here'. To me that isn't as
simple and clear as something like 'Click to Download'.
Might just be the way my brain is wired up, but it says to me 'you can
get it here on this web page somewhere', whereas something that
specifically says 'This is the link/image/gizmo you need to click on to
kick off the download' is evidently the bit you need to click on.
Dave.
>
> I also hope that we might provide a specimen <a><image /></a> that provides alternative texts that are useful for screen readers, text-to-voice, etc., and other accessibility-oriented purposes. I suppose it will be tagged as English, since "Get it Here" is.
>
> I'm abstaining on this: Drew provides significant effort here, and I recognize that. I am providing my impressions FWIW.
>
> - Dennis
>
> PS: Perhaps others can suggest translations for use on non-English sites. The URL might then need to change as well.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: drew [mailto:drew@baseanswers.com]
> Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2012 13:57
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
>
> On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 21:51 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote:
>> The way to deal with these things is acknowledge the need to use the
>> qualifier. Where there is a reasonable argument (blog titles on the ASF
>> home page for example) undertake to improve things and move on.
>>
>> These things come up occasionally when an interested IPMC member does a
>> review and sees things the rest of us missed. I brought it here in the hope
>> of preventing an IPMC mega-thread. Acknowledge it there, deal with it here.
>>
>> If it helps, I'm not worried about the logo thing, but that might be just
>> me.
>>
> Hi Ross, others,
>
> I'm not worried about the logo thing either per se, then again tradition
> is worth something isn't it.
>
> Anyway - here is one quick proposal for a logo change:
>
> http://lo-portal.us/aoo/temp/get-aoo-300x100-icv.png
>
> Let me know what folks,
>
> //drew
>
>> On Saturday, 23 June 2012, Dennis E. Hamilton
>> <de...@acm.org>
>> @ <de...@acm.org>acm.org <de...@acm.org>> wrote:
>>> I think it would be good and wait until the original reporter identifies
>> what the specific infraction is and what its cure is. One part of the
>> complaint is how AOOi is mentioned in tweets by @TheASF. Those are not, as
>> far as I am aware, anything under our control whatsoever.
>>> I would not dispense with full atom feeds.
>>>
>>> Having "(incubating)" used at the beginning of a post, even with a link
>> to what that entails, could be useful. Whether it needs to be in the title
>> or not remains to be seen.
>>> Of course, whatever the practice is asserted to be, it will need to be
>> honored by all incubating projects, of course.
>>> - Dennis
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir <ro...@apache.org>@ <ro...@apache.org>
>> apache.org <ro...@apache.org>]
>>> Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2012 08:40
>>> To: ooo-dev@ <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> Subject: Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:53 AM, drew jensen <dr...@gmail.com>
>> @ <dr...@gmail.com>gmail.com <dr...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 09:51 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:48 AM, drew <drew@ <dr...@baseanswers.com>
>> baseanswers.com <dr...@baseanswers.com>> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 08:52 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>> @ <ro...@apache.org>apache.org <ro...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Ross Gardler
>>>>>>>> <rgardler <rg...@opendirective.com>
>> opendirective.com <rg...@opendirective.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> It has been pointed out on the general list that AOO is not
>> always using
>>>>>>>>> the incubating qualifier. For example recent blog posts don't
>> include it.
>>>>>>>> It is right there, first thing on the page, in a very large font,
>> for
>>>>>>>> every blog post: "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> E.g, : https://<https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache>
>> blogs.apache.org<https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache>
>> /OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache<https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache>
>>>>>>> Note the <title> of the page says "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)".
>>>>>>> Ditto for the largest (and first) header on the page.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Looking at the general list, it sounds like NIck's issue was that
>> blog
>>>>>>> aggregators, such as used by Apache for generating content on the
>> home
>>>>>>> page are not picking up on this.
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe, I just read the incubator list also I think Nick is saying that
>>>>>> _any_ time the phrase Apache OpenOffice is used it must have the word
>>>>>> incubating included, not just in the title.
>>>>>>
>>>>> But that's not the policy. The policy is that it must be called out
>>>>> as incubating at first mention in the document.
>>>> That's what I thought also - I'm saying how it reads to me, that's all.
>>>>
>>> Maybe the key is to realize that when we publish a blog post, we
>>> publish two things:
>>>
>>> 1) A web page, which does IMHO have the correct incubation notices on it.
>>>
>>> 2) An Atom feed that will be used by websites and services outside of
>>> our immediate control, and which will not bring along the full page
>>> context from the blog.
>>>
>>> On the second one, I think the remedy might be get the incubation
>>> notice into the post ("entry") titles. It may be possible to do this
>>> automatically (per my previous post), but it could be done manually as
>>> well.
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>
>>>>>> //drew
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
>
> .
>
RE: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
OK, personal impression only:
I find the rainbow coloring through the text of "Get it Here" to be distracting and not helpful. I know some subset of us know what the colors represent, but I see no need to be cute about it. (Yes, this will be on the final exam.)
I also hope that we might provide a specimen <a><image /></a> that provides alternative texts that are useful for screen readers, text-to-voice, etc., and other accessibility-oriented purposes. I suppose it will be tagged as English, since "Get it Here" is.
I'm abstaining on this: Drew provides significant effort here, and I recognize that. I am providing my impressions FWIW.
- Dennis
PS: Perhaps others can suggest translations for use on non-English sites. The URL might then need to change as well.
-----Original Message-----
From: drew [mailto:drew@baseanswers.com]
Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2012 13:57
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 21:51 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote:
> The way to deal with these things is acknowledge the need to use the
> qualifier. Where there is a reasonable argument (blog titles on the ASF
> home page for example) undertake to improve things and move on.
>
> These things come up occasionally when an interested IPMC member does a
> review and sees things the rest of us missed. I brought it here in the hope
> of preventing an IPMC mega-thread. Acknowledge it there, deal with it here.
>
> If it helps, I'm not worried about the logo thing, but that might be just
> me.
>
Hi Ross, others,
I'm not worried about the logo thing either per se, then again tradition
is worth something isn't it.
Anyway - here is one quick proposal for a logo change:
http://lo-portal.us/aoo/temp/get-aoo-300x100-icv.png
Let me know what folks,
//drew
>
> On Saturday, 23 June 2012, Dennis E. Hamilton
> <de...@acm.org>
> @ <de...@acm.org>acm.org <de...@acm.org>> wrote:
> > I think it would be good and wait until the original reporter identifies
> what the specific infraction is and what its cure is. One part of the
> complaint is how AOOi is mentioned in tweets by @TheASF. Those are not, as
> far as I am aware, anything under our control whatsoever.
> >
> > I would not dispense with full atom feeds.
> >
> > Having "(incubating)" used at the beginning of a post, even with a link
> to what that entails, could be useful. Whether it needs to be in the title
> or not remains to be seen.
> >
> > Of course, whatever the practice is asserted to be, it will need to be
> honored by all incubating projects, of course.
> >
> > - Dennis
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir <ro...@apache.org>@ <ro...@apache.org>
> apache.org <ro...@apache.org>]
> > Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2012 08:40
> > To: ooo-dev@ <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> > Subject: Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:53 AM, drew jensen <dr...@gmail.com>
> @ <dr...@gmail.com>gmail.com <dr...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 09:51 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> >>> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:48 AM, drew <drew@ <dr...@baseanswers.com>
> baseanswers.com <dr...@baseanswers.com>> wrote:
> >>> > On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 08:52 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> >>> >> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
> @ <ro...@apache.org>apache.org <ro...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >>> >> > On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Ross Gardler
> >>> >> > <rgardler <rg...@opendirective.com>
> opendirective.com <rg...@opendirective.com>> wrote:
> >>> >> >> It has been pointed out on the general list that AOO is not
> always using
> >>> >> >> the incubating qualifier. For example recent blog posts don't
> include it.
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > It is right there, first thing on the page, in a very large font,
> for
> >>> >> > every blog post: "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)"
> >>> >> >
> >>> >>
> >>> >> E.g, : https://<https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache>
> blogs.apache.org<https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache>
> /OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache<https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Note the <title> of the page says "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)".
> >>> >> Ditto for the largest (and first) header on the page.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Looking at the general list, it sounds like NIck's issue was that
> blog
> >>> >> aggregators, such as used by Apache for generating content on the
> home
> >>> >> page are not picking up on this.
> >>> >
> >>> > Hi,
> >>> >
> >>> > Maybe, I just read the incubator list also I think Nick is saying that
> >>> > _any_ time the phrase Apache OpenOffice is used it must have the word
> >>> > incubating included, not just in the title.
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> But that's not the policy. The policy is that it must be called out
> >>> as incubating at first mention in the document.
> >>
> >> That's what I thought also - I'm saying how it reads to me, that's all.
> >>
> >
> > Maybe the key is to realize that when we publish a blog post, we
> > publish two things:
> >
> > 1) A web page, which does IMHO have the correct incubation notices on it.
> >
> > 2) An Atom feed that will be used by websites and services outside of
> > our immediate control, and which will not bring along the full page
> > context from the blog.
> >
> > On the second one, I think the remedy might be get the incubation
> > notice into the post ("entry") titles. It may be possible to do this
> > automatically (per my previous post), but it could be done manually as
> > well.
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> >>>
> >>> -Rob
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > //drew
> >>> >
> >>> > <snip>
> >>> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 21:51 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote:
> The way to deal with these things is acknowledge the need to use the
> qualifier. Where there is a reasonable argument (blog titles on the ASF
> home page for example) undertake to improve things and move on.
>
> These things come up occasionally when an interested IPMC member does a
> review and sees things the rest of us missed. I brought it here in the hope
> of preventing an IPMC mega-thread. Acknowledge it there, deal with it here.
>
> If it helps, I'm not worried about the logo thing, but that might be just
> me.
>
Hi Ross, others,
I'm not worried about the logo thing either per se, then again tradition
is worth something isn't it.
Anyway - here is one quick proposal for a logo change:
http://lo-portal.us/aoo/temp/get-aoo-300x100-icv.png
Let me know what folks,
//drew
>
> On Saturday, 23 June 2012, Dennis E. Hamilton
> <de...@acm.org>
> @ <de...@acm.org>acm.org <de...@acm.org>> wrote:
> > I think it would be good and wait until the original reporter identifies
> what the specific infraction is and what its cure is. One part of the
> complaint is how AOOi is mentioned in tweets by @TheASF. Those are not, as
> far as I am aware, anything under our control whatsoever.
> >
> > I would not dispense with full atom feeds.
> >
> > Having "(incubating)" used at the beginning of a post, even with a link
> to what that entails, could be useful. Whether it needs to be in the title
> or not remains to be seen.
> >
> > Of course, whatever the practice is asserted to be, it will need to be
> honored by all incubating projects, of course.
> >
> > - Dennis
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir <ro...@apache.org>@ <ro...@apache.org>
> apache.org <ro...@apache.org>]
> > Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2012 08:40
> > To: ooo-dev@ <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> > Subject: Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:53 AM, drew jensen <dr...@gmail.com>
> @ <dr...@gmail.com>gmail.com <dr...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 09:51 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> >>> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:48 AM, drew <drew@ <dr...@baseanswers.com>
> baseanswers.com <dr...@baseanswers.com>> wrote:
> >>> > On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 08:52 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> >>> >> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
> @ <ro...@apache.org>apache.org <ro...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >>> >> > On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Ross Gardler
> >>> >> > <rgardler <rg...@opendirective.com>
> opendirective.com <rg...@opendirective.com>> wrote:
> >>> >> >> It has been pointed out on the general list that AOO is not
> always using
> >>> >> >> the incubating qualifier. For example recent blog posts don't
> include it.
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > It is right there, first thing on the page, in a very large font,
> for
> >>> >> > every blog post: "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)"
> >>> >> >
> >>> >>
> >>> >> E.g, : https://<https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache>
> blogs.apache.org<https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache>
> /OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache<https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Note the <title> of the page says "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)".
> >>> >> Ditto for the largest (and first) header on the page.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Looking at the general list, it sounds like NIck's issue was that
> blog
> >>> >> aggregators, such as used by Apache for generating content on the
> home
> >>> >> page are not picking up on this.
> >>> >
> >>> > Hi,
> >>> >
> >>> > Maybe, I just read the incubator list also I think Nick is saying that
> >>> > _any_ time the phrase Apache OpenOffice is used it must have the word
> >>> > incubating included, not just in the title.
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> But that's not the policy. The policy is that it must be called out
> >>> as incubating at first mention in the document.
> >>
> >> That's what I thought also - I'm saying how it reads to me, that's all.
> >>
> >
> > Maybe the key is to realize that when we publish a blog post, we
> > publish two things:
> >
> > 1) A web page, which does IMHO have the correct incubation notices on it.
> >
> > 2) An Atom feed that will be used by websites and services outside of
> > our immediate control, and which will not bring along the full page
> > context from the blog.
> >
> > On the second one, I think the remedy might be get the incubation
> > notice into the post ("entry") titles. It may be possible to do this
> > automatically (per my previous post), but it could be done manually as
> > well.
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> >>>
> >>> -Rob
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > //drew
> >>> >
> >>> > <snip>
> >>> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
The way to deal with these things is acknowledge the need to use the
qualifier. Where there is a reasonable argument (blog titles on the ASF
home page for example) undertake to improve things and move on.
These things come up occasionally when an interested IPMC member does a
review and sees things the rest of us missed. I brought it here in the hope
of preventing an IPMC mega-thread. Acknowledge it there, deal with it here.
If it helps, I'm not worried about the logo thing, but that might be just
me.
Ross
On Saturday, 23 June 2012, Dennis E. Hamilton
<de...@acm.org>
@ <de...@acm.org>acm.org <de...@acm.org>> wrote:
> I think it would be good and wait until the original reporter identifies
what the specific infraction is and what its cure is. One part of the
complaint is how AOOi is mentioned in tweets by @TheASF. Those are not, as
far as I am aware, anything under our control whatsoever.
>
> I would not dispense with full atom feeds.
>
> Having "(incubating)" used at the beginning of a post, even with a link
to what that entails, could be useful. Whether it needs to be in the title
or not remains to be seen.
>
> Of course, whatever the practice is asserted to be, it will need to be
honored by all incubating projects, of course.
>
> - Dennis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir <ro...@apache.org>@ <ro...@apache.org>
apache.org <ro...@apache.org>]
> Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2012 08:40
> To: ooo-dev@ <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
>
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:53 AM, drew jensen <dr...@gmail.com>
@ <dr...@gmail.com>gmail.com <dr...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 09:51 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:48 AM, drew <drew@ <dr...@baseanswers.com>
baseanswers.com <dr...@baseanswers.com>> wrote:
>>> > On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 08:52 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>> >> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
@ <ro...@apache.org>apache.org <ro...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>> >> > On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Ross Gardler
>>> >> > <rgardler <rg...@opendirective.com>
opendirective.com <rg...@opendirective.com>> wrote:
>>> >> >> It has been pointed out on the general list that AOO is not
always using
>>> >> >> the incubating qualifier. For example recent blog posts don't
include it.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >> > It is right there, first thing on the page, in a very large font,
for
>>> >> > every blog post: "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)"
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >> E.g, : https://<https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache>
blogs.apache.org<https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache>
/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache<https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache>
>>> >>
>>> >> Note the <title> of the page says "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)".
>>> >> Ditto for the largest (and first) header on the page.
>>> >>
>>> >> Looking at the general list, it sounds like NIck's issue was that
blog
>>> >> aggregators, such as used by Apache for generating content on the
home
>>> >> page are not picking up on this.
>>> >
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > Maybe, I just read the incubator list also I think Nick is saying that
>>> > _any_ time the phrase Apache OpenOffice is used it must have the word
>>> > incubating included, not just in the title.
>>> >
>>>
>>> But that's not the policy. The policy is that it must be called out
>>> as incubating at first mention in the document.
>>
>> That's what I thought also - I'm saying how it reads to me, that's all.
>>
>
> Maybe the key is to realize that when we publish a blog post, we
> publish two things:
>
> 1) A web page, which does IMHO have the correct incubation notices on it.
>
> 2) An Atom feed that will be used by websites and services outside of
> our immediate control, and which will not bring along the full page
> context from the blog.
>
> On the second one, I think the remedy might be get the incubation
> notice into the post ("entry") titles. It may be possible to do this
> automatically (per my previous post), but it could be done manually as
> well.
>
> -Rob
>
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>> >
>>> > //drew
>>> >
>>> > <snip>
>>> >
>>
>>
>
>
RE: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
I think it would be good and wait until the original reporter identifies what the specific infraction is and what its cure is. One part of the complaint is how AOOi is mentioned in tweets by @TheASF. Those are not, as far as I am aware, anything under our control whatsoever.
I would not dispense with full atom feeds.
Having "(incubating)" used at the beginning of a post, even with a link to what that entails, could be useful. Whether it needs to be in the title or not remains to be seen.
Of course, whatever the practice is asserted to be, it will need to be honored by all incubating projects, of course.
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2012 08:40
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:53 AM, drew jensen <dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 09:51 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:48 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>> > On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 08:52 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> >> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >> > On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Ross Gardler
>> >> > <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
>> >> >> It has been pointed out on the general list that AOO is not always using
>> >> >> the incubating qualifier. For example recent blog posts don't include it.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > It is right there, first thing on the page, in a very large font, for
>> >> > every blog post: "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)"
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> E.g, : https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache
>> >>
>> >> Note the <title> of the page says "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)".
>> >> Ditto for the largest (and first) header on the page.
>> >>
>> >> Looking at the general list, it sounds like NIck's issue was that blog
>> >> aggregators, such as used by Apache for generating content on the home
>> >> page are not picking up on this.
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Maybe, I just read the incubator list also I think Nick is saying that
>> > _any_ time the phrase Apache OpenOffice is used it must have the word
>> > incubating included, not just in the title.
>> >
>>
>> But that's not the policy. The policy is that it must be called out
>> as incubating at first mention in the document.
>
> That's what I thought also - I'm saying how it reads to me, that's all.
>
Maybe the key is to realize that when we publish a blog post, we
publish two things:
1) A web page, which does IMHO have the correct incubation notices on it.
2) An Atom feed that will be used by websites and services outside of
our immediate control, and which will not bring along the full page
context from the blog.
On the second one, I think the remedy might be get the incubation
notice into the post ("entry") titles. It may be possible to do this
automatically (per my previous post), but it could be done manually as
well.
-Rob
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> >
>> > //drew
>> >
>> > <snip>
>> >
>
>
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Jun 23, 2012, at 8:39 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:53 AM, drew jensen <dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 09:51 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:48 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 08:52 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Ross Gardler
>>>>>> <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> It has been pointed out on the general list that AOO is not always using
>>>>>>> the incubating qualifier. For example recent blog posts don't include it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is right there, first thing on the page, in a very large font, for
>>>>>> every blog post: "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)"
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> E.g, : https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache
>>>>>
>>>>> Note the <title> of the page says "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)".
>>>>> Ditto for the largest (and first) header on the page.
>>>>>
>>>>> Looking at the general list, it sounds like NIck's issue was that blog
>>>>> aggregators, such as used by Apache for generating content on the home
>>>>> page are not picking up on this.
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Maybe, I just read the incubator list also I think Nick is saying that
>>>> _any_ time the phrase Apache OpenOffice is used it must have the word
>>>> incubating included, not just in the title.
>>>>
>>>
>>> But that's not the policy. The policy is that it must be called out
>>> as incubating at first mention in the document.
>>
>> That's what I thought also - I'm saying how it reads to me, that's all.
>>
>
> Maybe the key is to realize that when we publish a blog post, we
> publish two things:
>
> 1) A web page, which does IMHO have the correct incubation notices on it.
>
> 2) An Atom feed that will be used by websites and services outside of
> our immediate control, and which will not bring along the full page
> context from the blog.
>
> On the second one, I think the remedy might be get the incubation
> notice into the post ("entry") titles. It may be possible to do this
> automatically (per my previous post), but it could be done manually as
> well.
Give it 24 hours and I'll do it manually. It will take 20 minutes or less (except for the Japanese.)
>
> -Rob
>
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>>>
>>>> //drew
>>>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>
>>
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:53 AM, drew jensen <dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 09:51 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:48 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>> > On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 08:52 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> >> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >> > On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Ross Gardler
>> >> > <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
>> >> >> It has been pointed out on the general list that AOO is not always using
>> >> >> the incubating qualifier. For example recent blog posts don't include it.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > It is right there, first thing on the page, in a very large font, for
>> >> > every blog post: "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)"
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> E.g, : https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache
>> >>
>> >> Note the <title> of the page says "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)".
>> >> Ditto for the largest (and first) header on the page.
>> >>
>> >> Looking at the general list, it sounds like NIck's issue was that blog
>> >> aggregators, such as used by Apache for generating content on the home
>> >> page are not picking up on this.
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Maybe, I just read the incubator list also I think Nick is saying that
>> > _any_ time the phrase Apache OpenOffice is used it must have the word
>> > incubating included, not just in the title.
>> >
>>
>> But that's not the policy. The policy is that it must be called out
>> as incubating at first mention in the document.
>
> That's what I thought also - I'm saying how it reads to me, that's all.
>
Maybe the key is to realize that when we publish a blog post, we
publish two things:
1) A web page, which does IMHO have the correct incubation notices on it.
2) An Atom feed that will be used by websites and services outside of
our immediate control, and which will not bring along the full page
context from the blog.
On the second one, I think the remedy might be get the incubation
notice into the post ("entry") titles. It may be possible to do this
automatically (per my previous post), but it could be done manually as
well.
-Rob
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> >
>> > //drew
>> >
>> > <snip>
>> >
>
>
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by drew jensen <dr...@gmail.com>.
On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 09:51 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:48 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 08:52 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> >> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> > On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Ross Gardler
> >> > <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
> >> >> It has been pointed out on the general list that AOO is not always using
> >> >> the incubating qualifier. For example recent blog posts don't include it.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > It is right there, first thing on the page, in a very large font, for
> >> > every blog post: "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)"
> >> >
> >>
> >> E.g, : https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache
> >>
> >> Note the <title> of the page says "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)".
> >> Ditto for the largest (and first) header on the page.
> >>
> >> Looking at the general list, it sounds like NIck's issue was that blog
> >> aggregators, such as used by Apache for generating content on the home
> >> page are not picking up on this.
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Maybe, I just read the incubator list also I think Nick is saying that
> > _any_ time the phrase Apache OpenOffice is used it must have the word
> > incubating included, not just in the title.
> >
>
> But that's not the policy. The policy is that it must be called out
> as incubating at first mention in the document.
That's what I thought also - I'm saying how it reads to me, that's all.
>
> -Rob
>
> >
> > //drew
> >
> > <snip>
> >
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:48 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 08:52 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>> > On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Ross Gardler
>> > <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
>> >> It has been pointed out on the general list that AOO is not always using
>> >> the incubating qualifier. For example recent blog posts don't include it.
>> >>
>> >
>> > It is right there, first thing on the page, in a very large font, for
>> > every blog post: "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)"
>> >
>>
>> E.g, : https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache
>>
>> Note the <title> of the page says "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)".
>> Ditto for the largest (and first) header on the page.
>>
>> Looking at the general list, it sounds like NIck's issue was that blog
>> aggregators, such as used by Apache for generating content on the home
>> page are not picking up on this.
>
> Hi,
>
> Maybe, I just read the incubator list also I think Nick is saying that
> _any_ time the phrase Apache OpenOffice is used it must have the word
> incubating included, not just in the title.
>
But that's not the policy. The policy is that it must be called out
as incubating at first mention in the document.
-Rob
>
> //drew
>
> <snip>
>
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 08:52 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Ross Gardler
> > <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
> >> It has been pointed out on the general list that AOO is not always using
> >> the incubating qualifier. For example recent blog posts don't include it.
> >>
> >
> > It is right there, first thing on the page, in a very large font, for
> > every blog post: "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)"
> >
>
> E.g, : https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache
>
> Note the <title> of the page says "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)".
> Ditto for the largest (and first) header on the page.
>
> Looking at the general list, it sounds like NIck's issue was that blog
> aggregators, such as used by Apache for generating content on the home
> page are not picking up on this.
Hi,
Maybe, I just read the incubator list also I think Nick is saying that
_any_ time the phrase Apache OpenOffice is used it must have the word
incubating included, not just in the title.
//drew
<snip>
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Ross Gardler
> <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
>> It has been pointed out on the general list that AOO is not always using
>> the incubating qualifier. For example recent blog posts don't include it.
>>
>
> It is right there, first thing on the page, in a very large font, for
> every blog post: "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)"
>
E.g, : https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache
Note the <title> of the page says "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)".
Ditto for the largest (and first) header on the page.
Looking at the general list, it sounds like NIck's issue was that blog
aggregators, such as used by Apache for generating content on the home
page are not picking up on this.
I'm not sure whether we have much control of this, but maybe someone
with Roller admin access can check to see if there is a setting to
automatically insert the blog title into the Atom entry title. Some
blogging software allows that. Then the aggregators would see
something like: "[Apache OpenOffice (incubating)] 5 Million Downloads
of Apache OpenOffice"
> I don't see how anyone could miss it.
>
> Is there a concrete suggestion on how we could make this more obvious?
>
> -Rob
>
>> Let's not forget it please.
>>
>> Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
Re: Must use the incubating qualifier
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Ross Gardler
<rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
> It has been pointed out on the general list that AOO is not always using
> the incubating qualifier. For example recent blog posts don't include it.
>
It is right there, first thing on the page, in a very large font, for
every blog post: "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)"
I don't see how anyone could miss it.
Is there a concrete suggestion on how we could make this more obvious?
-Rob
> Let's not forget it please.
>
> Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.