RGB ES wrote:
2013/3/19 Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org>
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 6:17 PM, Keith N. McKenna
<keith.mcke...@comcast.net> wrote:
RGB ES wrote:
<snip>
Hi Ricardo;
I appreciate the link and hopefully it will prompt people to start using
it
more. I have been wracking my brains trying to think of ways to get more
people interested. We seem to have had a flurry after the initial
announcement, but except for a few entries in the status document I see
nothing except your excellent work. We need to figure out some way to
attract people with the skill and knowledge to start on the other
applications.
I think we need more "hand holding" and guidance for new volunteers.
Just pointing them to wiki is not enough. With QA new volunteers I
gave them specific assignments at first, e.g., review these 10 bug
reports. I know it sounds odd to "assign" tasks to volunteers, but
until they find their way around and self-assign tasks, this is a good
way for them to get started. In return, with QA, I promised to review
their early work and give them feedback.
So I wonder if we can come up with set of specific tasks, of various
sizes, from 1 to 8 hours, and specifically asked new volunteers to
pick from that list? It might work better.
It is certainly worth a try. We have hard virtually nothing from many of
the volunteers since there initial contact.
That's a good idea. The tasks I can think of are two:
- Proofreading of still not checked pages
- Accuracy / clarity: ask the volunteer to follow the steps described to
see if they work or not.
Is version 4.0 far enough along in the development cycle that accuracy
checking is feasible or should we have 2 rounds of checking? The first
against 3.4.1 to clean up any problems there and then a second more in
depth one when 4.0 is more stable.
Regards
Ricardo
<snip>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: doc-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: doc-h...@openoffice.apache.org
