Re: [tdf-discuss] Addons (was: Re: Do not support writing to OOXML format)

Michael,

Le Tue, 4 Jan 2011 00:28:58 +0930,
Michael Wheatland <michael@wheatland.com.au> a écrit :

> On 03/01/2011 8:46 PM, "Charles-H. Schulz" <
> charles.schulz@documentfoundation.org> wrote:
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > Le Mon, 03 Jan 2011 10:58:18 -0000,
> > Zaphod Feeblejocks <zaphodfj@gmail.com> a écrit :
> >
> > > On 3 Jan 2011 at 17:29, Michael Wheatland wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Could addons be clearly signposted on the main page?
> > > > >
> > > > > Could first-time users be taken to the addons page, so they
> > > > > know functionality can be extended?
> > > > >
> > > > > Could addons be clearly posted in the menus?
> > > > >
> > > > > Could the frequency of downloading addons be counted and a
> > > > > pack of the most popular ones be compiled?  Could the
> > > > > most-frequent-addons pack even be an optional extra included
> > > > > with the download?
> > > >
> > > > Zaphod,
> > > > I have some good news for you. The website team is already
> > > > tackling this with the Drupal implementation.
> > > >
> > > > In case you are not aware the current site at libreoffice.org is
> > > > earmarked for an upgrade (as per the steering committee advice).
> > > > The website team has been busy building the site over at a
> > > > temporary domain www.libreofficeaustralia.org
> > >
> > > Great work!
> >
> > While I do thank Michael for its great work I believe there's a
> > slight misunderstanding here: Michael's own exploratory work might
> > be used one day for the LibreOffice website, but it is at this
> > stage not considered for an "upgrade".
> >
> > best,
> > Charles.
> >
> > > zf
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Charles-H. Schulz
> > Membre du Comité exécutif
> > The Document Foundation.
>
> Charles,
> Far from being 'my' exploration work, the majority of the website
> team has contributed towards this project after the Steering
> Committee discussion and the outcome of which, I am paraphrasing, to
> implement the Silverstripe CMS on Drupal.org with a view to go with
> Drupal long term.

"to implement the Silverstripe CMS on Drupal.org" does not seem to mean
anything to me. "With a view to go with Drupal" was rather: with the
possible option of Drupal in the long term. 

> The progress made by many of the contributing members has been
> fantastic, and although I have been the most vocal of the website
> development team regarding the implementation of a community building
> and tooling site there are many other people who have done fantastic
> work.
>
> I will be applying to the Steering Committee soon to set a target
> date for implementation in order to focus the website team on a
> tangible goal.

Well there will be no target, I'm afraid. 

> There does seem to be a little bit of misinformation out there
> regarding this SC decision, but it is quite clear if you listen to
> the decision outcome statement on the recording of the SC meeting.
>
> I am sure this will be clarified when the website team applies for a
> further decision on implementation.


"a little bit of misinformation", Michael, is perhaps your enthusiasm
leading to understand things the way you would like them to be :-). At
this stage, I don't believe we have any clear plans to move to Drupal;
there seems indeed to have been some early misunderstanding, but if you
wish the SC will clarify its position (again) .  But given that I'm a
member of the said SC, it might be useful to you to take my words into
account.

Best,
Charles. 

> Michael Wheatland



-- 
Charles-H. Schulz
Membre du Comité exécutif
The Document Foundation.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***