Present: davidwboswell, lforrest, paulosman, liz, morgamic, janet,
ryan, rebron, fligtar, jslater, juanb, fuzzyfox, mary, fwenzel
- Domain name strategy
There had been a lot of discussion about the plan in various places
before this meeting (including the last taskforce meeting, governance
list, in person discussions, etc) so the focus of this meeting was to
make a decision about the proposal.
We did have some discussion about the specifics of things though, but
this covered ground discussed elsewhere such as how will this change
access control for groups, what does this mean for local sites and
affiliates, survey data related to this change, etc. I'd recommend
looking through the proposal and the discussion thread on the
governance list for more details.
The taskforce has not approved anything in previous meetings, so we
discussed how this should be handled. David recommended asking if
anyone had any objections and then if there were none the proposal
would be approved. There were a couple of clarifications made at this
point, but no objections so the proposal was approved. Laura and
David will work on starting the implementation process and can report
back at next meeting.
- Abandoned sites
Ryan gave an update on his work with putting a structure in place for
abandoned sites using the Mozilla Service Week site as an example. He
is scrapping that data to a read-only archive site. More details
about his plans are in the proposal on the wiki.
Two issues came up for discussion: how to identify inactive sites and
whether to archive or delete old sites. For identifying sites there
doesn't seem to be an automated way to do this. David has pulled some
information together in the Archive section of the Directory page and
asked other people to help him update that with other candidate sites.
There was a question about how much effort to expend on archiving an
old site. David and Mary recommended archiving sites when possible in
order to preserve the community's history even if a site only gets a
small amount of traffic. That having been said, there will likely be
instances when turning off a site makes the most sense.
Maybe the difference is related to a site's function -- a content site
should be archived since it talks about our history (such as Download
Day) but a tool that is no longer used doesn't have historical value
(like Doctor). Ryan suggested we should create some guidelines that
could be used to help make a decision when dealing with an inactive
- Common footer
Liz said that the legal team would like to include links to the
also recommend that sites have information about the license that site
content is under. The license information may vary across sites so
this wouldn't fit in the global footer, but we can document it as a
There was then a discussion about how the footer could contain
relevant information from across the community and not just legal
information. John mentioned the metrics team had suggested having a
site tracking opt-out in the footer. FuzzyFox also mentioned he was
continuing working on his embeddable community map.
Next steps for this are to continue gathering content ideas and then
start working on design mockups after the upcoming Firefox site
redesign. More at the proposal on the wiki.
- Web fonts
There was no update on the progress of this proposal but there was a
discussion about the topic. Morgamic brought up some technical points
to consider to help with page load times, such as shipping a font with
Firefox (it sounded like Safari might already do this) and using a
separate sub-domain to server font files.
For next steps, anyone interested in this topic is encouraged to get
together and look into these and any other questions and we can dive
into this more early next year. More at the proposal on the wiki.