Loading...
 
Skip to main content
2
Page actions
PDF Print Get a short URL Open in WebDAV
NEW CONTRIBUTORS: Please Read

This is a meeting of the Editorial Board - it runs online from July 1 to July 31, 2008.

  • Undecided motions are carried over to the next month.
  • Passing a motion requires 50% plus one of the current members.
  • Members who didn't participate in the last two meetings (either missed them or too new contributors to the Editorial Board) are not considered current, and are encouraged to keep contributing to the Editorial Board meetings in the following months.
  • Members considered current for this meeting (7): chibaguy, dthacker, luci, marclaporte, mlpvolt, ricks99, xavi
    Passing or defeating a motion will require 4 votes this month.
  • Contributors to this meeting: chibaguy, dthacker, luci, marclaporte, ricks99, xavi (+ add your name if you vote for anything)


Last meeting: Editorial Board Meeting 2008 06 | Next meeting: Editorial Board Meeting 2008 08

{MAKETOCBOX(float=>right)}{MAKETOCBOX}

Motions Passed Last Month

  • Motion 1: "Leave the settings where there has been no argument against, as they we initially set after the irc discussion on irc the day that Xavi upgraded doc.tw.o to 1.10"
  • Motion 2: "Enable blog (or anything else) as on other tw.o sites where site admins could quickly put what change they done to site config. — luci"
    Done (July 11, 2008 - Xavi): blog1
  • Motion 3: "Defining groups, permissions and contributions, based on a scheme".
    Done (July 11, 2008 - Xavi).
    User Role Ability
    Anonymous Reader Read only
    Tag (with CAPTCHA)
    Rate
    Any registered tw.o user Contributor, minor Edit pages
    Tracker (log issues)
    Doc contributor Contributor, major Comments
    Editor Contributor, major
    Editor     		Admin
  • Registered users should be allowed to edit/update wiki pages, as needed.
  • Doc contributors should use the pages' comments for editorial discussions of the page. This would:
    1. Eliminate the comment noise from "registered users" who use the comments for support questions.
    2. Replace the Author Coffeeshop forum.
  • Editors are admins of the docs.
  • Motion 4: "Use H2 to define the motion title, and enclose its description in a text box"

Motions Defeated Last Month

  • Motion 1: "Use the example below as an "Information Sub-Section on all documentation pages." (kernel22's proposal)
  • Motion 2: "Use for documentation page formatting something like the example shown here" (ricks proposal)


1. Motions Carried Over

1.1. Screenshot Tagging/Captioning

-
Motion: Tag or identify with a caption the version of Tiki each screenshot is from with the goal of the screenshots matching either the current release, or the current release candidate, whichever is more imminent.

In the case of today, we would try and get all screenshots current as of 1.10.0 until we come up with a 1.10.1 down the road. The Change Log proposed above will fill in the blanks. Maybe also have a "-HEAD" version of the page that talks about and documents changes to an existing feature that are in development in the head branch. When the time comes, those details can be easily incorporated into the current release page. Obviously, if the feature doesn't exist yet, then instead of ahving a -HEAD version (for example Contributions-HEAD), then it'll just be the name of the feature (Contributions) and in the Change Log section we'd have "1.11.0 - Introduced". I think we need to document new features that are being developed, but keep it separate from what is current so as to avoid confusion.

Discussion:

  • All screenshots should have a standard caption including version. We could add an "under development" tag as the equivalent to HEAD.(dthacker)
  • I personally think that having a HEAD version of any doc page publicly available is dangerous. The HEAD version is not easily available. Too many newbies are going to ask... Why is the doc page showing me 1.10, but I can only download 1.9.9??
    ricks99
  • in fact, they can indeed download 1.10 (or HEAD) at their own risk, from Download page (-> http://dev.tiki.org/Download). Mmmmmm, I like the idea: some people might like the idea of using 1.9.9 in themeantime but knowing that in the next version (1.10 in this case) this or that feature or enhancement is already coded and working... (specially if we as community take so long between releases of new stable branches...) (Xavi)
  • One problem with a standard (static) caption is that as soon as a new Tiki version is released, all the doc captions are going to be (or appear to be) out of date. I mean if the screenshots were all labeled 1.9.11 now, what happens when 1.10 is released? People need to know what info is for what version, but hardcoding the version in the doc page should be done as little as possible, I think, since many or most descriptions will continue to be valid even as version numbers increase. Maybe the assumption should be (and described somewhere) that screenshots are accurate for the latest stable version unless otherwise indicated.
  • ricks99: Could we use the Versions plugin for this, maybe?


Vote
In Favor: dthacker, xavi, ricks99 (via the Versions plugin )

Opposed: chibaguy (opposed to specific version numbers on screenshots unless the image is for a beta or old release)

1.2. Using SourceForge for downloads

Motion : Keep all can we keep all file downloads on SourceForge instead on doc.tw.o server. Since the link to the latest pdf file in your doctwo server (http://doc.tiki.org/files/Tiki19beta.pdf) is written in several places (and I don't remember all of them, but I remember there were a bunch of places), I would suggest to do the following:
  • remove the current Tiki19beta.pdf at the ftp server behind http://doc.tiki.org/files/
  • create a folder called "Tiki19beta.pdf"
  • add an index.html inside, with a redirect to

http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=64258&package_id=68737&release_id=582492

(from Marc, rescued from a proposal sent months ago by him and xavi to Editorial Board Meeting page)

Discussion:
Marc:

  • For instance :

http://doc.tiki.org/files/Tiki19beta.pdf

We could have a permanent redirect. Ex.: http://doc.tiki.org/printed to the exact location on SF (which could change over time)

It will reduce the load on my server and be counted towards our stats over there.

  • Xavi:

    I fully agree with you Marc. When I uploaded my first .odt & pdf, I didn't have access to upload files to tikiwiki area in sf.net, but I do right now.

    Months ago I uploaded files to tw area in sf.net, including the latest pdf from doc.tw.o:
    http://downloads.sourceforge.net/tikiwiki/Tiki19beta.pdf?modtime=1204906231&big_mirror=1

    And we could do something similar for the odt file? (or maybe it's not needed since less people download the source pdt file)...


Vote
In favor: xavi, ricks99, chibaguy, luci

Opposed:

1.3. New Editor in Chief

Motion: That candidates for editor in chief be nominated (or nominate themselves) by editing the page: Editor in Chief, and that the nomination process simply entails improving (on that page) the definition, responsibilities and priorities for someone in that role.


discussion

Dave:
Dave Thacker has been a great chief editor. He wants to step down gracefully and we are hard pressed to honorably refuse. 😊


Dave:''Over the last 3-4 months, I've found myself increasingly pulled to other parts of the tikiwiki project (Testing, UI issues, Packaging, Database neutrality, Hosting) and I think it's time to put more of my efforts into those areas.

This is to let the Docs Editorial Board know that they should pick a new

Editor in Chief next month, and that person should plan on taking over June''

  • Xavi: I think we might not need that role as far as ebm keep working...


Vote
Opposed: luci (I also think (like Xavi) we don't need that role at all), chibaguy

1.4. Proposed changes to doc.tw.o site

Motion: In addition to the doc.tw.o admin items included in prior motions, I would like to suggest some other structure changes to the site


Discussion

  1. Remove the Search by Page Name module.
    We already have the Search bar in the header. Maybe (possibly) keep it for Registered users; but I think Anonymous visitors will become confused with 2 different search boxes
    • luci: I'm not sure how efficient is the top search when you look for wiki page name
      • ricks99: Ok, i can see your point. But for the 90% of anonymous visitors, they're not searching by page name. They have no idea (nor should they care) what the page name is — they just want content.
  2. The Documentation menu is empty for Anonymous visitors.
    What's it for?
    • luci: huh ? it's not empty here for me as Anonymous...
    • ricks99: Actually, what's going on is... the module uses the "flip" parameter, but the FLIP icon is only visible when you hover over the menu title. I think this is bad usability — if the module/menu is minimized, there's no way for user to know how to maximize it!
      • chibaguy: That's good feedback, Rick. I made the flip icons visible on hover to reduce visual clutter, which I think is a problem more with the rather bright blue shaded icon in 1.10 than with the smaller black line-drawing icon in 1.9. But if this is a usability problem, then I should look into always-on icons, and maybe have theme-specific icon images. (Sometimes the default 16x16 px is also too large, and Sylvieg pointed out there could be a performance hit for using CSS to resize them as I've been doing.)
  3. Remove the To register module.
    Instead, let's add this information to the tiki-login.tpl template. Additionally it should be in the "become an author" section.
  4. Remove the Last Forum Posts module
    I thought we were going to remove the forum functionality completely?
  5. Change the Most Popular Tags module to a cloud, and show more than 10 tags. For example:


Vote
In Favor: ricks99, Xavi, chibaguy, luci

2. New Motions

2.1. New Motion 1

Motion: Allow registered users to be added to DocContributors, after they confirm they have joined the TikiWiki Community Group. See http://tikiwiki.org/tracker8


Discussion: This way there is a natural way to stop new users to just stop by and through their questions as comments to pages. Adn doesnt' require a process that some of us have to review and validate user requests...

In Favor: Xavi

Opposed:

2.2. Dogfood versions plugin

Motion: To use PluginVersions as seen in Manual Installation to distinguish 1.9.x vs 2.x docs


Discussion:

In Favor: marclaporte

Opposed:

2.3. New Motion 1

Motion: Describe it here in 1 or 2 paragraphs. Just describe, dont discuss or justify why you propose that.^


Discussion: Describe here why you propose that, pros and cons, etc. as much as needed.

In Favor:

Opposed:

Next meeting: August 2008

History Source
Slideshow