Touching on the "community feedback system". Is worth having a ticket
submitted to get a project added to the "To Review" list? I'm thinking of
some kind of custom link to a ticket submission that pre-fills some of the
fields to set it apart from the regular tickets. (I haven't yet had a
chance to check out the ticket-entering side of things, but I'm kinda
assuming that it's a browser-centric process.)
=======================================================================
John M. Troan <jtroan(a)jt-sw.com>
Maintainer: Football Site @
JT-SW.com
http://www.jt-sw.com/football
Chief of Computer Operations
U.S.S. Kitty Hawk / NCC-1659
=======================================================================
infrastructure-bounces(a)lists.fedoraproject.org wrote on 05/03/2014
11:49:58:
Bill Wood <bwood(a)simbox.io>
Sent by: infrastructure-bounces(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
05/03/2014 11:50
Please respond to
Fedora Infrastructure <infrastructure(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
To
Fedora Infrastructure <infrastructure(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>,
cc
Subject
Re: Fedora Hosted Project Guidelines (Ticket #847)
These are very good points, Pierre! I figured these questions would
come up at some point.
If you go and look through the list of packages on
fedorahosted.org,
you'll notice a lot of "Welcome to Trac!" homepages. The ones that
were changed from that are usually very sparse in words, and don't
do a good job of describing what the package is or does. It took me
a very long time to find the three examples that I put in the doc.
Just looking through the site can prove my point there.
For the checks, I'm thinking about ways to automate it. We would
really just need to crawl the database and look for specific things.
Maybe we also set up a community feedback system where users can
tell us if there's not enough content (kind of like Google Play, but
not broken beyond repair) so that we can go in and take a look at
what's wrong. The goal is to have as little work to physically do
while keeping the site useful, and that has been my mindset through
this process.
On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Pierre-Yves Chibon
<pingou(a)pingoured.fr
> wrote:
On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 03:01:57PM -0500, Bill Wood wrote:
> I've been thinking about a few ways we can clean up
fedorahosted.organd,
> after talking with Kevin, I think I've got a good enough
draft to
let you
> guys give any input you might have. I've pasted the draft
at
> http://paste.fedoraproject.org/98687/
This was an interesting reading, but I have some questions regarding
it:
> good bit of the projects on
fedorahosted.org are not documented at all
by
> their creators. Some haven't been updated in years and are
> probably abandoned.
Do we have any information on this? Is this based on a "gut feeling"or on
some
actual data?
> We archive projects that do not meet specific checks
So these would be automated or manual checks? If the later, we'll
need to figure
out a mechanism for a project to move back to the list of active project
no?
The text you present here are meant to be placed on the FAQ? Or on the
page
presenting how we qualify project has been active or not?
Basically the idea sounds fine but I am a bit wondering how big it is and
how
easy it would be to automate (because I don't think we would
want
manual checks).
What's your thoughts? :)
Pierre
_______________________________________________
infrastructure mailing list
infrastructure(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
_______________________________________________
infrastructure mailing list
infrastructure(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure