Re: [tdf-discuss] The need of a central employment-office-like web structure for TDF/LibO volunteers
It seems to me that a simple structure of choices is what is called for,
first basic types of contributions, code, artwork, advertising and
promotion, distribution of burned disks, technical contribution not
requiring a knowledge of coding. Then when you have entered the area
where you could contribute, there would be a division of task sizes,
like the 1 hour or less, 1/2 day or less, one day or less, 2 days or
less, 1 week or less and so forth that was described here earlier. then
finally a listing of the specific tasks. there might also need to be a
division based on skill levels or particular basic skills, particularly
under the category of coding.
On 15/05/2011 11:44, Gianluca Turconi wrote:
Yes, on the current wiki, I agree, even if the template helps a lot,
but the scope is too large to have the few click you want.
the system could be a bug tracker with a less technical UI than BZ, but
I think a wiki with a good template could be enough. Why do you say
Because you have to navigate *a lot* through the currently on line
wiki before finding the info a contributor may need in order to
contribute. Too many clicks, IMO.
A easier wiki template may do the trick, but it should be bare to the
bone, because it's just a matter of going directly to the point:
contributing according to one's skills and available time.
agreed too and even it will take some management time, better lose it
here than the contributor one.
If I have, let's say, 1 free hour to contribute, I should be able to
find fast whatever task I can complete in such an hour. If I have 1
free day, I should be able to find fast whatever task has a 1 day
estimated time for its completion.
However, it's absolutely important that no potential contributor's
time is wasted in *finding how to contribute". You know, time is
This statement is true both for the core contributor and the casual
or potential one.
The only difficulty I see here is the amount of tasks that will have
to be listed and may be that will blur a bit the vision of the overall
workflow. The level of detail is rather high if you list contributions
for 1 hour of work or so.
If the project would have such a central system for the management of
the contributions, I think there would be a more efficient work flow
too, because *everybody* would know who is in charge for a task, what
progress has been made and what is still missing.
yes, even if we have good ways to monitor what is already done, in
that area, the more the better.
It may be useful to track contribution too, for future TDF
applications and reviews of such applications. Everything would be
So now, you've find what to do for your next free hours ;-)
I for instance would like to contribute to improving the word list for
the spell check program in Writer. I suspect that this would require
the help of someone who could tell me how to find and extract a copy of
my personal dictionary. I suspect that there may be many such technical
but non coding tasks where the contributer may need to team up with
someone who can advise them on the more technical aspects of the task at
I have been a subscriber to the OOo Discuss list since 2001, and
remember well the days when there was far more activity on that list. I
have noticed that list fading much more rapidly since the TDF/LO fork.
So now I am here and willing to help however I can.
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Impressum (Legal Info)
: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our trademark policy