On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 5:35 AM, Keith N. McKenna <keith.mcke...@comcast.net> wrote: > Rob Weir wrote: >> >> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 2:47 AM, Keith N. McKenna >> <keith.mcke...@comcast.net> wrote: >>> >>> 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. >>> >> >> Another thing would be for one of the moderators of the mailing list >> to cross reference current list subscribers with those who said they >> wanted to help. Some of them may not have subscribed to the list. >> With the QA team I did that and then sent reminders to those who were >> not yet signed up. > > > I am not a moderator but if one can get the list and e-mail it to me I will > do the cross check and send out the reminders. >
OK. I'm not a moderator on this list either. So who is? -Rob > Keith > > >> Any moderator can request the subscriber list by sending this commend >> from their moderator email address: doc-l...@openofice.apache.org >> >> Although you should not share the list publicly, since it has >> everyone's email address, it would be interesting to know how many >> people are subscribed in total. >> >> -Rob >> >> >>>> >>>> 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 >>> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: doc-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: doc-h...@openoffice.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: doc-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: doc-h...@openoffice.apache.org
