Re: [boost] [proposal] The boost.org Maintenance Effort

Subject: Re: [boost] [proposal] The boost.org Maintenance Effort
From: Stewart, Robert (Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-05-26 09:19:05

Dean Michael Berris wrote:
>
> Communication
>
>   * We should make it easy for the whole boost community (boost.org)
> and individual library maintainers/community to communicate messages
> to the world at large in an easy, unobtrusive manner.
>
>   * We should make communication a two-way process by encouraging
> participation (see Participation below).
>
>   * We should strive to communicate more, instead of communicating
> less -- to do this we should make it part of the goal of those in the
> Boost community (not necessarily developers) to promote the libraries
> and the website itself.

All reasonable and, to some degree or other, already satisfied.

> Participation
>
>   * Let's encourage participation in the form of comments to blog
> posts, feedback on documentation pages, and discussions on specific
> topics/threads.

It is already painful to keep up with all of the different places where people choose to post information.  Do we really need more?  I'm wary of the fragmentation that this could engender, but perhaps the user side of Boost would benefit most from this change.

>   * Let's make it easier for non-developers to contribute to the
> effort in the form of community building, providing support, and
> advocate the library.

A nice idea.

>   * We should use the boost.org website as a means of reaching out to
> and being one of the ways the open source community and industry at
> large can get in touch with: individual developers, library
> maintainers, or the Boost community (including users) at large.

Nice.

> Collaboration
>
>   * Let's add the boost.org website as an additional channel through
> which collaboration can occur as a complement to the boost-developers
> and boost-users mailing lists.

This sounds like fragmentation and, therefore, is worrisome.  Is it truly helping to add yet more places one must search to find information relevant to an issue or question?  If boost-users were replaced by this mechanism, it might be practicable.

>   * Let's foster a more community-driven way of solving problems
> without having to require everyone to be part of a central list.

The lists can be off-putting, to be sure.  Greater segregation is useful but it leads to information silos.

>   * Let's allow communities around Boost libraries to grow and get
> things done on the boost.org website.

Building library-specific communities is a good idea.

> Step 1: Move static and not-so-static content over to Wordpress MU [0]

Like Beman, I really don't know what that means in terms of appearance, layout, navigation, or management.

>   1. Establishing a "Feedback" button that allows anybody visiting the
> site to post feedback on whatever they think. I would prefer to use a
> service called Get Satisfaction [1] to gather and manage the feedback,
> as well as responding to feedback posted through that service.

The web site certainly needs a feedback mechanism.  I have no comment on the appropriate tool for the job.

>   2. Incorporating a DisQus [2] discussion system to manage comments
> on pages. There is already a Wordpress plugin for this and comment
> moderation would mostly be handled initially by me and other
> administrators interested in helping out in this effort.

Comments for blog posts, doc pages, etc., could be useful.  Does DisQus handle the spam issue?

>   3. Integrating and publishing regularly the Google Analytics and
> Wordpress MU stats on the whole site. Regularly can mean either
> monthly or weekly depending on who often the community wants
> information about the site.

I suppose this is to gauge popularity of libraries or specific pages?

> Step 2: Make it easy to jump from Wordpress MU to Trac for the Wiki,
> Tickets, and Source Viewer

It goes without saying that all web content must be well integrated.

> Step 3: Set up blogs for individual libraries (who want it, or at
> least for library maintainers/volunteers who want to manage it)
>
> Ideally this should be done for all the libraries. Each sub-site would
> include (at the minimum):
>
>   * A blog -- where only the maintainers and those nominated by the
> maintainers to have blog posting access can communicate what's
> happening, what's coming, whether they need help, or whether there are
> any nasty bugs that need attention (as well as just some general
> updates or cool findings regarding the library).

I'd agree that all libraries should have this, even if only as a place for release managers to post something.

>   * Static Pages -- typically there would be pages like "About",
> "History", "Examples", and "FAQs" which generally are mostly static.
> These can be edited by the maintainers and those nominated by the
> maintainers who would have access to these pages.

+1

>   * Support Information -- this would be a special static page which
> would point to Trac, or other places where the development and support
> system of the library is hosted. I am not excluding the possibility of
> having libraries developed in github/gitorious/sourceforge. Links to
> things like the mailing list on which the discussion happens, whether
> there's a web-based forum, or whether there's a number/company to call
> for support would generally go here too.

+1

>   * Online documentation -- as an absolute minimum there should be a
> page on documentation for each library in Boost accessible from the
> boost.org website. It would be a good thing to integrate the generated
> library documentation into the wordpress system itself, but at the
> minimum links to the generated library docs that are statically served
> (just like now) would be acceptable.

This is certainly necessary.  If each documentation page were served separately with a comments section, then documentation comments could be managed away from the developer's list.

> Ultimately I would personally want to see boost.org be able to handle
> the growth of the Boost C++ Library, and allow for more communities
> (not just one community) to through the site. I don't want it to
> replace the mailing list for Internet old timers like me who like this
> feel of email conversation, but for things like announcements and
> communicating to the wider audience I think the website should do that
> job superbly.

A number of your suggestions seem contrary to this affirmation of the list(s).

_____
Rob Stewart                           robert.stewart_at_[hidden]
Software Engineer, Core Software      using std::disclaimer;
Susquehanna International Group, LLP  http://www.sig.com

IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.