7:46 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Neary" <dneary(a)redhat.com>
To: infra(a)ovirt.org
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 10:53:04 AM
Subject: Re: oVirt site organization
Hi Alon,
On 12/18/2012 07:59 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> Not sure this is the right list...
It will do to begin :-) We had design discussions on arch@ before,
and
implementation decisions here.
> I think that there is a gap from what user(and developer) expects
> to see in open source (or any) site and what we have.
>
> We are missing "Support" category, there we should have the user
> lists and a link to bugzilla, and some bugzilla links for reports
> (opened bugs for example).
My thinking re "Support" is that it could be a good addition -
currently
"Documentation" and "Community" answer the use-case "Help!
I'm stuck"
-
plus, of course, the integrated search box. My only concern is that
we
already have 6 top-level menu items, and adding another one would
make
things worse from a usability point of view. Perhaps "Support" could
replace one of the other top-level menu items - but which one?
Support is a must, people look for this word.
Drop the community, as it has no sense, the whole ovirt is a community.
Open source project has usually several top most goals:
1. license - IMPORTANT artifact, it is one of the first things people are looking in open
source project.
2. support - IMPORTANT artifact, mailing lists, bugzilla.
3. source - IMPORTANT artifacts, this is open source project, the source is the center of
all activity.
> We are missing "Source" category, a clear place of how to obtain
> the source, as we do not have proper gitweb with list of projects,
> at least link to http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/admin/projects/.
On "Source" I don't really think it is a top-level menu item. There
is a
much better argument for "Support" or "Get help".
People should have immediate path to access the source in open source project, this is
what it is about.
There is a general ergonomics rule of thumb that top-level
categories
should not be more than 5 or 6, and not be fewer than 3 or 4 - even 6
is
giving the user a lot of choice and a lot of things to read, and if
you
only have 2 items, you're better off avoiding a header altogether and
designing your page around those 2 categories. So I'm happy having
"Get
the source code" under "Develop" and under "Download".
I don't approve these ergonomics rules... If these rules makes the site unusable for
me as a new comer, and I cannot find what I look for (which I do find in other similar
sites), then something is wrong with these rules.
We don't have a good page on getting the source code right now -
the
process is different for Node, Engine, VDSM, etc. This might be a
good
community project for someone.
It is master site design... not a separate project.
> Community is not a proper word for "Mailing lists",
first thing I
> look is for "list" in the home page and I expect it to be there,
> the term "Have conversations on our mailing lists" is not
> something common although it may be good English.
>
> At http://www.ovirt.org/Mailing_lists, I expect the term "Full
> index of mailing list" instead of "the oVirt mailman page".
>
> In the "the oVirt mailman page" we are missing vdsm lists.
On the location of the mailing lists: The Community page could
perhaps
be improved. There is a lot of text right now, and we can definitely
improve on it and make the actions available much more prominent.
Suggestions are welcome!
On the VDSM mailing lists being missing from the oVirt mailman page,
this is a consequence of the list being hosted on fedorahosted -
suggested improvements to the text are appreciated.
All source repositories and mailing list of ovirt should appear in ovirt.org.
This includes all related projects without exception.
Thanks,
Alon.