[General] [Proposal] Rationalizing our Downloads pages

[Katie Capps Parlante]

We have two open bugs remaining wrt rationalizing "Downloads" and "Get 
Source" related pages for the Desktop:

Refactor "Getting Chandler" and related pages
https://bugzilla.osafoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8439

Update DownloadDesktopSource page
https://bugzilla.osafoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9958

I've asked Philippe to drive from here, finishing up any remaining 
refactoring or cleanup.

Philippe, the two main entry points should be from the download page:
http://chandlerproject.org/Projects/DownloadChandlerDesktop

And from the developer wiki home:
http://chandlerproject.org/Developers/WebHome

It might also be worth looking at the other related links on the 
developer wiki (run | build | test | dogfood).

Thanks!

Cheers,
Katie

Grant Baillie wrote:
> 
> On 12 Jul, 2007, at 12:42, Mimi Yin wrote:
> 
>> Hi Grant,
>>
>> I agree that the DesktopSource page could be cleaned up a bit, though 
>> I feel I'm not the best person to do that. Katie/Ted, is this part of 
>> your Developers Wiki efforts?
> 
> Personally, I would just be up for blowing away the red double-outline 
> :o. But in any case, the highlighting of the last "Release" of 16+ 
> months ago, and the associated between-the-lines kind of implications, 
> will be obsolete once Preview ships.
> 
>> I think though the terminology will necessarily be different for 
>> end-users versus Developers. Developers distinguish between the two. 
>> End-users probably shouldn't think too objectively about this kind of 
>> stuff. I always find it weird when I'm reading end-user agreements and 
>> what-not. Feels like someone is watching me. (Or...maybe I'm 
>> misunderstanding what your terminology comment was about.)
> 
> No, you're right re: terminology.
> 
> --Grant
> 
>>
>> Mimi
>>
>> On Jul 12, 2007, at 12:25 PM, Grant Baillie wrote:
>>
>>> Delicious!
>>>
>>> My one issue -- and I think it's probably not a big deal -- is that 
>>> we have a red double-outlined box on ChandlerDesktopSource saying 
>>> that the latest official Chandler release is “Release 0.6.1, 
>>> 2006-02-08”. Should I consider this an incentive to get Preview out 
>>> the door :) ?
>>>
>>> In any case, maybe the terminology in the two pages 
>>> (Releases/Milestones/Continuous vs Latest/At-Your-Own-Risk) could be 
>>> synced or x-referenced better?
>>>
>>> --Grant
>>>
>>> On 12 Jul, 2007, at 10:58, Mimi Yin wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've pulled together 2 sets of Download pages with some help from 
>>>> Bear :)
>>>>
>>>> Downloading Chandler Desktop and Building Chandler Desktop from the 
>>>> Source Code
>>>> http://chandlerproject.org/Journal/DownloadChandlerDesktop
>>>> http://chandlerproject.org/Projects/ChandlerDesktopSource
>>>>
>>>> Downloading Chandler Server and Building Chandler Server from the 
>>>> Source Code
>>>> http://chandlerproject.org/Journal/DownloadChandlerServer
>>>> http://chandlerproject.org/Projects/ChandlerServerSource
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to move all download links to the Developers Wiki except 
>>>> for Download Chandler Desktop, which should live in the recently 
>>>> deprecated Projects Wiki and display as chandlerproject.org/download 
>>>> (as per the URL plan Jared and I worked out.)
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone see any issues with this proposal?
>>>>
>>>> Mimi
>>>>
>>>> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>>>>
>>>> Open Source Applications Foundation "General" mailing list
>>>> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/general
>>>
>>> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>>>
>>> Open Source Applications Foundation "General" mailing list
>>> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/general
>>
>> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>>
>> Open Source Applications Foundation "General" mailing list
>> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/general
> 
> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
> 
> Open Source Applications Foundation "General" mailing list
> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/general