Forum OpenACS Q&A: Call for Volunteers: Redesign OpenACS.org inside and out

I checked bugtracker today, and most reported bugs don't seem to be bugs, but :

1. Error messages on a local install, so outside controle of Oacs distribution.
2. Simple typing errors in the code.
3. Creative ideas to enhance user experience.
4. Referals to problems not related to the packages, but related to dependancies. In that model, the package maintainer concept won't work, as each hacker will have his/her pet project.
5. Bugtracker doesn't seem to have a function that allows bugs to be closed, anyway, I couldn't find it.
6. Many user problems are caused by conflicts between packages. These are referenced, but mostly never solved.

If the bugtracker would be monitored from within the project management module, problems could be tackled more effectively.

I think we need a bugtraker editor, who monitors bugtracker and forums and evaluates what needs to be done to solve problems. I volonteer to do the editting and analyis, but would need a programmer to double check my newbie assumptions. Based on that analysis, we could create a billable hour job exchange.

I will follow up later with my own requirments to to give this idea more body.
Cheers

I would like a consensus on whether the community would adopt a name change to OACS instead of OpenACS. There are some advantages in going with OACS.

1. The Open prefix is kind of redundant in this day and age of if it isn't Microsoft then it must be open source.
2. OACS is easier to remember.
3. OACS is preferred by graphics designers as it makes designing logos easier.

What does the community think?

OAKS on the other hand is a nice word, but has nothing to do with OpenACS. This has also an implication for the URL. As all versions of oaks are taken (oacs.biz does not help either though), we would still have to mention Openacs so people can find the website.

OACS => OpenACS is an easy translation
OAKS => OpenACS ... welll.....

PS. So much for my previous statement on saying that "open" is redundant and out of fashion. :)

Great idea Nick (asking Dorian).

We should go with that logo and a clean css based look.

Here is a tableless example: http://blesius.org/projects/openacs/openacs.html

It is a clean css based design. I put it together an hour or two ago (before the OpenSolaris link) based on something I worked on with a colleague for a medical site at work. Take the css list based menu for the menu at the top of the page from my example, take the logo from Dorian, and plug it into the OpenSolaris example (which provides a place for the teasers we have for forums, news, etc.) and we have a new design (the OpenSolaris site is a table free design and seems to work well). After we get a new site master up we can start reorganizing the content.

Thanks for starting the thread Dave.

Carl

P.S. I do not think we should drop the Open in OpenACS, but I am not in the mood for bikeshedding. If the masochistic renaming plan does continue I do hope it results in something totally different (would be a waste otherwise: Oaks, OACS, OpenACS... we have all been there and done that).

A few problems may be seen in the reply. Right now the design of the web site works, but yes it may be dated. The content is often sited as useless at this point. Ask anybody that doesn't hang around the project long. Oh wait, they don't hang around because the can't find the information.

Of course, many of the post here involve the logo and the name. Ironically, if the information was available on the site people might understand the logo and the name. Avoiding questions like "Why Not Switch the Name to ACS?" See, the content is a bit lacking unless you want to spend days search the forums.

I have the say that right now the web site offers little value.

Instead of giving the site a boob job why not worry about a major concern that most people express and fix up the content and organization on the site. Any plan that doesn't focus solely on content issues could be just a waste of time. A pretty web site that doesn't' provide information, answer questions, and visitors has no real value to the project, developers, and users.

I started a thread https://openacs.org/forums/message-view?message%5fid=345759 for folks to say what OpenACS is to them and why they use it. Let's put this into words so we can share the benefits with visitors to opeancs.org.

If you think content is of value to you, then how about contributing in that area?

I think one of the problems is a lack of coordination. I have spare time I can give over to this kind of stuff, but to be frank, I don't have the time to second guess, or figure out what it is I should be doing and whether it has value.

Documentation (or lack of it) gets a lot of air time but where's the plan? where's the prioritised list of items?

Everybody hates working to moving goalposts or on projects where there's a lack of direction.

I don't think relying on people to just provide things ad-hoc is likely to be effective.

What I'd like to see on the site is one place where there are a list of prioritised tasks waiting to be done. I can go in, pick one off and get it done in the full knowledge its worthwhile.

It needs to be pretty fine grain, there's no point putting up task like 'write the installation document'. Break it up into little bit-sized chunks and I guarantee people will start doing them.

I want the site to visiually represent items crossed off a list. I want tangible feedback about progress. I want to see regular annoucements of work completed.

This 'tangible feedback' is a critical component of any successful commcercial software project (for good reason) and I think applies equally to an OS group.

People get satisfaction when their contribution is effective and immediate and can be seen to move things forward.

For this to work we need visibility of this todo list. Not many venture into the bugs section, so we need to bring the bugs section to them. So we should create an "Action List" on the front page of OpenACS that just pulls tickets from the openacs.org component in bug-tracker.

This is where personalisation would be nice. Ideally I would like to see a personlalised Google-like home page where you can drag around blocks of content from bug-tracker, wiki, forums, blog, etc. That way developers can display a bug-tracker block, and casual users can choose not to.

The features in project manager also help to organise the commercial aspects of the workerbee idea (timesheets etc). Maybe in an ideal world it would make sense to combine bugtracker and projectmanager, in the same way logger integration is created or as optional plug-in.

This may create duplicate functionality, in that case it would be an interesting excersise to trim down the code. From personal experience I can can tell there are more candidates for such an approach, Eventmanager and Room reservations spring to mind. Both packages would benefit from the same plug in approach.

Just a thought

I usually would call for a brainstorming session along with mindmapping at this point, but well, there is no collaborative mindmapping tool out there yet.

I'd suggest we split up this discussion into questions that need to be answered by the website (after all, it is mainly our content that needs to be improved along with the navigation to it, only after that comes design, name and logo). I created a wiki page, where I would like all to write down questions first and structure them into parts later (https://openacs.org/wiki/Questions). Once we have the questions and the parts, we could use the PM to create an improve openacs.org project and let the volonteers deal with the groups and answer these questions.

This would also be the time to thing about the new design and the name, if need be, so work could be done in parallel.

And once this is done the marketing group can start and get things rolling.

Three things which jump to my mind out of this dicussion:

- Dicusssion forums are for discussions, not collaboratively getting work done. Thats why I started the wiki.
- Volunteers need an easy method of helping out. Docbook is not easy. Coding isn't either. We need to provide them with the tools to make contributions easy (apart from the discussion forum).
- Eat your own dogfood. OpenACS should be one of the showcases for the tool itself. Don't be restrictive on installing packages, just because it might increase the maintainability.

ah....

And just a reminder, original topic of discussion is not about mindmapping ;)

Have a good day,
Romas

On the redesign od openacs website we have to think in having tools like poll, survey.. tools that can give us information about what user needs, the most wanted modules (packages =) ), rate packages.. We need a way to know what they are looking for..

Are there enough requirements listed (that will result in significant use improvements) so that we can move to the next step?

Take note that they don't have a forum for their community. They just have a blog and a wiki, and some info about their IRC channel. Very simple, clean, and organised.

They don't have any news items or latest postings on their front page. Just some information about their project and the community. Makes you wonder whether you really need to have news items and latest forum postings on the front page. Especially since the developers would be subscribed to their weblogs RSS feed, and curious new comers would just follow the link to the blog.

So really the rails website is just a place card for new comers to check out the project. Their developers would either be hanging out in their IRC channel or subscribed to the blog's RSS feed.

Should we adopt this design and organisation as well?

A site like that looks like its had about a weeks thought/work on it. If thats all we're aiming at we may as well leave things as they are.

Either raise the bar, or head to the bar ;)

No offence to ]project open[, but in the spirit of promoting OACS toolkit, it might be more logical to use OACS prjoject manager module. I do like Nick's idea of using weblogs more prominently

Cheers
Ben

What I'm anxious to avoid is the same problem we had with trying to run collaborative testing a few years ago where basically we spent more time setting up and managing servers for supporting the testing than actually getting testing done.

If however the PM module is up to scratch then of course we shouls use it.

Should there be a plan before using project manager?

How well does project-manager handle projects that are not on a strict time-line or "floating" dependencies? Given that this redesign may not be well worked out ahead of time?

Do we want to expose the possibility of using a potential flagship package in an inappropriate way?

Would configuring the bug/ticket tracker to use project/tqm phase ticket types be more appropriate? For example: Observation, Problem report, Suggestion, To do. OpenACS almost has this configuration on the OpenACS.org bugtracker.

I think the rails site has superb marketing and branding. That site is all about selling and I think that's the way it should be.

I'll have to have a think about what makes good examples. However, the problem with finding examples is that in the same way that its hard to find another piece of software that mirrors the ACS its also difficult to find a site that encompasses all the aspects I'd like to see.

I've already had quite a lot to say on the subject earlier in this thread and therefore I'm in danger of repeating myself (and boring everyone rigid), but perhaps I can explain by way of 'thin slices', i.e. there are sites out there that have aspects of what I'd want, but are not in themselves complete. Also, there are sites that demonstrate exatcly what I don't want to see. I dislike using negative examples, but if you'll bear with me perhaps it will help.

Ruby on Rails

http://www.rubyonrails.org

Ok, I'll start with the exemplar you gave. First impression of the site is that it looks like an advert. The very phrase 'Web development that doesn't hurt" sounds like a strap line. The front page is committing lots of horrible sins about how websites should function. The quotes fading in and out are make it look like a video billboard. I absolutely hate the fact that its got a central column (nasty to read) and that its wasting valuable screen space. Its my browser and I expect sites to use the space I provide to the fullest.

I can't really make much comment on the content or collaborative nature of the site because there a) isn't enough and b) what is there isn't jumping out at me.

On the other hand its fairly clean and uncluttered and quite direct and to the point. In fact it seems to be saying 'come on in, this is easy to use, this is for newbies'.. perhaps this is a reflection of the relative lack of sophistication of RoR? Either way I don't think this kind of site would be a good reflection of ACS. What kind of newbies are we aiming for? Acs is for sophisticated applications. This is somewhat orthoganal to the goals of many newbies. We surely want to attract 'experienced' newbies?

Anyway, I don't wish to be overly critical of your exemplar, but hopefully you can see where I'm coming from. We should be aiming for a site that is more than simply an online brochure/sales leaflet. Incidentally I suspect that where the site really wins is in its subject matter. People are saying warm fuzzy things about Ruby, and I think almost any site would benefit from the association... A shame TCL does not seem to attract the same warmth.

Apache

http://apache.org

This site has always had a lot going for it. Its simple, clean and purposeful. It lacks the 'advertising' feel of many other sites and it resonates nicely with web developers (i.e. white background, black text, blue links... )

However theres only one aspect that interests me here and that's how Apache presents itself as a focal point rather than a product. What I would take from Apache is the way it treats sub-projects. There is obviously the core product (apache itself) but along side that is over 20 related projects. Each is fairly autonomous with Apache being the unifying theme. I would like to see this approach with Acs packages and related projects. OpenACS should be the body around which other projects orbit. There have been various comments from people who claim that its hard to commit their work to the community. They should be encouraged to become orbiting satellites, prominent and yet autonomous.

Hibernate

http://www.hibernate.org

Ok, there are plenty of things wrong with this site but it does do a number of things very, very well. Read through some of the FAQs or docs. They are *extremely* bullish about their product. Now, as a database centric kind of guy I'm no fan of Hibernate; yet more middleware for the Java boys. However the product itself if you ignore its motivations is first rate. The site knows exactly who its audience is and appeals to them. It know that is main user base is in the middleware space, it is sympathitic to the fact that this is 'enterprise' software and it presents itself in such a way that it appeals to the middle-manager-mindset. It avoids advertising in favour of justification through argument. It is not particularly newbie centric but I think this is the correct approach. The product is not intended for the faint hearted and is squarely aimed at professionals. Correctly so.

Wikipedia

http://www.wikipedia.org

Ok, this is an easy and I'm sure popular choice. This site is really good and I think a lot can be gleaned from it both in terms of presentation and purpose. I won't even bother going into detail because it so obvious for all to see. However I will say that when I first came across it it reminded me a bit of the kind of sites the ArsDigita folks used to bang on about building. QED.

TwoplusTwo

http://www.twoplustwo.com

Now this is unusual as it must be a contender for the worst looking website in human history! But, whats important here is that this site is therefore the embodiment of the idea that content is king. Its looks absolutely appauling and yet its hugely popular. It has one of the most active forums/communities out there. It contains a wealth of useful information and has community members who really know what they are talking about. It shows that substance on the web is far more important than appearance.

Spring

http://www.springframework.org

Many of the comments that applied to Hibernate apply here. However this also looks quite nice (subjective of course). The reason I mention Spring is that these guys are getting the attention that we could/should/would be having. Everything about Spring is about how you take a wholly inappropriate technology (Java) and try fit-it-in. If you've spent more than about a day with a dynamic language then you'll understand what a giant red-herring Spring is. The kinds of problems that Spring solves (agile, SOA, IOC, lightweight development) are problems that barely even exist within a framework like OpenACS. Where they have it right is in exactly that word 'framework'. The aspect I'd take form here is the idea of Acs as a framework for solutions.

Ok, I could go on all day and still not make a complete argument, however hopefully the principle comes through. The site must match the community and the product. As our product is distinct so it follows the site must have its own character. We cannot find another site and say 'like that', we must analyse what we are, what we do and what we like from whats out there; and create something individual.

I suspect that we all know what sites 'look good' (take the bbc for example). The real key is whether they have the substance. Anyway, perhaps this is a good first step. Lets find aspects of other sites that would be a good fit for Acs, from there we can build a list of requirements and from there a plan...

I agree with some points, but let me explain some of my points to make the picture more clear

as of "management" - it is obvious we are not talking about management in a corporate sense, it is rather about community leadership, where - because of project/code complexity - it is impossible to make things moving on only by occassional volunteers, working almost independently on their "islands" of code

look what Torben posted here:
https://openacs.org/forums/message-view?message_id=352202

in short: yes, it seems we are "reinventing" old ideas here, all this was discussed many times, in detail, and here is the problem: there is large codebase, there is HUGE discussions base, ideas, started efforts, etc. but mostly never completed

I can imagine, reading Lars explanation why he leaved OACS, all this current chaos is not simply because there is too big codebase and too little development team, I wish it could be that simple

but at this point I have to repeat myself, please, don't start (at this point) any fundamental discussion, there were many such HUGE discussions in the past, with almost none result

please START with SIMPLE things, make simple spring-cleanup, it doesn't require any changes in codebase or community structure, and AFTER comeback to harder problems

why I am repeating this call for spring-clean-up on surface level before starting with these harder parts ?

simple, to avoid further looking as almost dead project and dead community, and dead website, to breakthru that feeling that there is no chance to change anything for better

I have strong feeling the problem is not too large codebase and too little developers base, the problem is:

too little people believes in OpenACS future !!!

Lars lost his vision about OACS, he lost any hope anything can be done here, and this is why he quit

give them hope and simple facts, let them see it CAN happen !!!

I agree, "Logos and brand identity are not a waste of time", but when you have that level of chaos, confusing information, broken packages, you have something to do _before_ you can expect new logo will make OACS famous

this is not a rocket science, I would like to see fresh, clean design, logo and content here, but market says market wants something different first, market wants working apps, not just new framework release, not just new logo

you always have two options: listen what market wants, or guessing what market wants

if you have to see this yourself, nobody can stop you, but why not to take this opportunity to avoid further frustration being "in the shadow" ?

please continue with redesign efforts, it is also very important, but don't think this will change anything in the near future if you will not put some effort to simple spring clean up here as explained in many posts

Cheers,
Adam

The following questions are useful.

1. Is A something we want done? (The OCT has the final decision on this in general)
2. Is there someone who wants to and can do A? (Each individual volunteer decides this)

And the same questions on B.

Arguing that A shouldn’t be done because B is better is often pointless. There is no fixed pie of labor. If we agree that both A and B should be done then please be supportive of people who are doing both A and B. If you don’t think A should be done then please make that argument based only on the merits of A. That you think B is more important is really not that relevant. Bashing B is likely to make a volunteer who wanted to do B go away and not do anything, so think if that is what you want before you post.

At this time we are a community of volunteers. I’d ask everyone to find a place where they can pitch in and do something helpful that they feel is important.

If you would like a decision made please let the OCT know. You can reach us at mailto:oct@openacs.org. We meet on Tuesday (as in tomorrow) 11pm UTC 6pm EST 3pm PST in the #openacs channel. Procedures for official TIP decisions are here: https://openacs.org/forums/message-view?message_id=115576

Who is on the OCT can be found here:
https://openacs.org/governance/

Like Caroline said, this is not a company, nor would any of us want it to be. For some, the toolkit is their livelihood, for others it is just a hobby. For me it is a bit of both.

The people that form this community are extremely passionate about the toolkit, and contribute out of their own free will. So if I can't be allowed to express myself freely, then I can just as easily do a Lars and find some place else where my contributions will be welcomed. That is the reality of open source projects.

I should however state that I am not Lars, nor do I plan on jumping ship anytime soon. I am very passionate about the OpenACS toolkit and the Community. In fact the Community is why I ditched Sakai in favour of OpenACS. It is also worth reading the entire thread to gauge just how passionate people are about OpenACS.

So, where do we go from here? Well you can either be a chief and stay in this thread, or you can be an indian and help out with the wiki project in this thread.

We had a great discussion over the christmas period about changes, so it would be a shame to sink back into "sit & wait". I created an oacs 5.2 ETP section, based on the assumption that to new users it'll make more sense reading about the latest release, than all the historical considerations.

What would people like to have added to this? Maybe the folks that participated in the christmas discussion would like to have edit access so we can get things moving.

I know ETP is not ideal,and XO wiki is superior, but that's not available yet. Maybe we need to upgrade first, before we start playing, so ETP can be depriciated.

Just a thought

Ben

1. Mount XOWiki.
2. Find out who would like to participate.