New www.mozilla.org designs posted and brown bag on Thursday
davidwboswell
http://redesignmozilla.org/2009/03/mozilla-redesign-round2/
Please feel free to comment on the blog or stop by the brown bag
tomorrow at 1 pacific in Building K or on air.mozilla.com to discuss.
Thanks,
David
Nelson Bolyard
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Mozilla.org/Repository_Transition
where it says:
> CVS has many known issues as a version control tool and we feel that
> using a more modern VCS will make maintaining the site easier.
I don't buy any of that.
Yes, CVS has limitations. But since www.mozilla.org doesn't have lots
of branches and other complexities, those issues don't seem relevant.
Easier? for whom? Subversion is "Yet Another" version control system. For
someone who has NO OTHER USE for it whatsoever, having to learn
Yet Another VCS, just for this web site, is certainly no easier at all.
This really smacks of "This other VCS is new and cool and we people
who work just on web sites wanna play with it". If you maintained
the content in all the project pages, I'd say "fine", but you don't.
What this change will actually accomplish is to drive people who do
occasionally contribute to www.mozilla.org away. It will certainly
drive the people who are responsible for everything in
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/ away.
:-(
davidwboswell
Thanks for the feedback. Nothing is set in stone at this point and
we're talking to people now so we can adjust our plans as needed. We
definitely don't want to drive people away, so let me know if any of
this additional information is helpful:
- For any repository that we choose, we still have plans to have an
editing interface, like Doctor, that people can use without having to
mess around with a VCS tool.
- Subversion is widely used on other community web sites and I think
there is value in minimizing the number of different systems being
used for web sites across the community.
- There are some limitations to CVS that are relevant for the site.
- There is some content on the site, like documentation, that belongs
on other sites, such as MDC. Once these pages are migrated the choice
of tools on www.mozilla.org is no longer relevant.
David
> I just read
>
> https://wiki.mozilla.org/Mozilla.org/Repository_Transition
>
> where it says:
>
> > CVS has many known issues as a version control tool and we feel that
> > using a more modern VCS will make maintaining the site easier.
>
> I don't buy any of that.
>
> Yes, CVS has limitations. But sincewww.mozilla.orgdoesn't have lots
> of branches and other complexities, those issues don't seem relevant.
>
> Easier? for whom? Subversion is "Yet Another" version control system. For
> someone who has NO OTHER USE for it whatsoever, having to learn
> Yet Another VCS, just for this web site, is certainly no easier at all.
>
> This really smacks of "This other VCS is new and cool and we people
> who work just on web sites wanna play with it". If you maintained
> the content in all the project pages, I'd say "fine", but you don't.
>
> What this change will actually accomplish is to drive people who do
> occasionally contribute towww.mozilla.orgaway. It will certainly
Nelson Bolyard
> Nelson,
>
> Thanks for the feedback. Nothing is set in stone at this point and
> we're talking to people now so we can adjust our plans as needed. We
> definitely don't want to drive people away, so let me know if any of
> this additional information is helpful:
>
> - For any repository that we choose, we still have plans to have an
> editing interface, like Doctor, that people can use without having to
> mess around with a VCS tool.
How much content on www.mozilla.org comes from people who don't use VCSes?
> - Subversion is widely used on other community web sites and I think
> there is value in minimizing the number of different systems being
> used for web sites across the community.
What value is that? How does the version used by some irrelevant project
have any bearing on Mozilla?
On the other hand, using the same VCS for Mozilla web sites as is used
for other Mozilla purposes has many advantages that directly affect the
contributors to Mozilla's various repositories and web sites.
> - There is some content on the site, like documentation, that belongs
> on other sites, such as MDC.
Frankly, MDC's new format is seriously unacceptable as a replacement for
the format now in use on www.mozilla.org. Even wiki.mozilla.org is
better than devmo. Compare a page that exists on both.
https://wiki.mozilla.org/CA:Certificate_Download_Specification
https://developer.mozilla.org/en/NSS_Certificate_Download_Specification
> Once these pages are migrated the choice
> of tools on www.mozilla.org is no longer relevant.
I think I see a big hint there. :(
I'm on it. I'm looking for a new home for NSS docs now.
Robert Kaiser
> I'm on it. I'm looking for a new home for NSS docs now.
Those are developer docs, so they belong on MDC. If you have issues with
how that site works, please direct those to mozilla.dev.mdc so Sheppy et
al. can address them.
Robert Kaiser
Sheppy
wrote:
> Frankly, MDC's new format is seriously unacceptable as a replacement for
> the format now in use onwww.mozilla.org. Even wiki.mozilla.org is
> better than devmo. Compare a page that exists on both.
>
> https://wiki.mozilla.org/CA:Certificate_Download_Specification
> https://developer.mozilla.org/en/NSS_Certificate_Download_Specification
What's the problem? This looks fine to me...
Eric Shepherd
Developer Documentation Lead
Mozilla Corporation
http://www.bitstampede.com/
Philip Chee
> On Apr 8, 6:37 am, Nelson Bolyard <NOnelsonS...@NObolyardSPAM.me>
> wrote:
>
>> Frankly, MDC's new format is seriously unacceptable as a replacement for
>> the format now in use onwww.mozilla.org. Even wiki.mozilla.org is
>> better than devmo. Compare a page that exists on both.
>>
>> https://wiki.mozilla.org/CA:Certificate_Download_Specification
>> https://developer.mozilla.org/en/NSS_Certificate_Download_Specification
>
> What's the problem? This looks fine to me...
By the way, now that XULPlanet is off-line, people are still trying to
avoid DevMo by using google cache to look at cached copies of XULPlanet.
I think that that is a big hint to you that DevMo is (still) having
serious accessibility problems despite your claims that everything is fine.
Phil
--
Philip Chee <phi...@aleytys.pc.my>, <phili...@gmail.com>
http://flashblock.mozdev.org/ http://xsidebar.mozdev.org
Guard us from the she-wolf and the wolf, and guard us from the thief,
oh Night, and so be good for us to pass.
[ ]Can't learn to do it well? Learn to enjoy doing it badly!
* TagZilla 0.066.6
Michael Lefevre
> On Apr 8, 6:37 am, Nelson Bolyard<NOnelsonS...@NObolyardSPAM.me>
> wrote:
>> https://developer.mozilla.org/en/NSS_Certificate_Download_Specification
>
> What's the problem? This looks fine to me...
Well, just my personal view, but at a glance I'd say that the text in
the code boxes is much too small relative to the size of the main text;
I find the extra space between lines makes it actually harder to read
(while fitting less text onto the screen so more scrolling is needed),
and I have to resize my browser so that the paragraphs aren't so wide
that they are stretched onto a couple of lines so I lose my place
reading from each line to the next.
Michael
davidwboswell
I don't have stats on how many people use Doctor vs. how many people
commit using CVS. If it would be possible to get those stats then it
would be interesting to have that information. Regardless though,
having a way to edit pages through the web is a requirement and we
intend to have something available.
> What value is that? How does the version used by some irrelevant project
> have any bearing on Mozilla?
>
> On the other hand, using the same VCS for Mozilla web sites as is used
> for other Mozilla purposes has many advantages that directly affect the
> contributors to Mozilla's various repositories and web sites.
I was referencing other Mozilla community web sites here. Right now
someone who knows how to commit a change to www.mozilla.com can not
use that experience to commit a change to www.mozilla.org. I think
moving to Subversion on www.mozilla.org will help broaden the amount
of people who are able to work on it. Of course we can certainly
debate if that is worth any pain with transitioning off of CVS for
current committers.
> > Once these pages are migrated the choice
> > of tools onwww.mozilla.orgis no longer relevant.
>
> I think I see a big hint there. :(
> I'm on it. I'm looking for a new home for NSS docs now.
I was making a general statement that some content currently on
www.mozilla.org belongs on MDC and wasn't making any particular
comment about NSS pages. For the past year we have been archiving and
migrating documents off of www.mozilla.org and that's a separate
process from any repository transition. If you'd like to talk about
where the best place is for NSS pages, I'm happy to talk with you
about that.
David