Website discussion (split between marketting / community / development
jgarnett at refractions.net
Tue Oct 17 21:30:55 EDT 2006
Auke Jilderda wrote:
> Well yes. My point is that I have the impression that quite some people
> in the OSGeo community are not satisfied with CN but mainly because they
> are trying to use it for something that it was not designed to do.
No worries on that front - my discontent is my lack of involvement with
this committee :-) Your product is safe from my complaints....
> I very purposely distinguish marketing and community. I think it works
> best to distinguish to target audience and the audiences any succesful
> Open Source community has are the following three:
> - (Candidate) users
> - Testers and potential contributors
> - Developers
We have a slightly different breakdown represented by the stories
collected on our wiki. Although it strikes me we need at least one story
built around a member of the OSGeo foundation trying to participate in
>> Do you have any recommendations for managing a "straightforward web
>> site"? I suppose we could look into what eclipse.org uses ...
> Ehm, there are many ways to do it. My main message here is that, in my
> opinion, it would help OSGeo to make the distinction into marketing,
> community, and development and not try to shove all three into a single
> solution or a single blend of solutions. The three are fundamentally
> different, have fundamentally different target audiences, a
> fundamentally different dynamic, and fundamentally different
An early example of this was the split between the OGC website and
portal. I am/was trying to capture this
with user stories.
> Does that make sense?
It does, in terms of "blending everything" do not worry - we already
know that this cannot be achieved. We have a couple up front constraints
that preventing this:
- content hosted by individual projects require a "bridge" to so they
can participate in the overall OSGeo web experience
- supporting day-2-day foundation activities
We should canvas the projects to see what they want to take on
responsibility for, or what they are expecting from the web committee.
More information about the Webcom