Re: [Savannah-hackers-public] Modifying Savannah website

[Sebastian Gerhardt]

On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 23:25 -0400, Nicodemo Alvaro wrote:
> On 5/11/09, Sebastian Gerhardt <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Hello Silvain,
> >
> > I can't keep pace with the project submissions.
> > Many of them block too long because of the same issues again and again
> > and I blame this to the fact that Savannah's hosting requirements
> > are somewhat scattered around all over GNU and Savannah.
> >
> > The checklist on the registration page is a good start but I think
> > it will need additional information. So I want to modify this page
> > in a way that I hope will make it more clear that:
> >
> > a) The project will be denied approval until all mandatory requirements
> > are met. Submissions that obviously ignore these points are disapproved
> > without further comment.
> >
> >
> > b) All these hard requirements are listed in one place together.
> > If I remember correctly, we have at least three different places for
> > this as of now.
> >
> >
> > I hope this will make the approval process more predictable to the
> > author and more effective for us.
> 
> I think that the best source of information is already linked from
> that page you wish to edit. I agree with that the requirments are
> dispersed in different directions. I do not even see the number one
> issue addressed in the requirements: copyright and license notices.
> 
> http://savannah.gnu.org/register/requirements.php
> 

Yes, I think this page should contain all our mandatory requirements.
And the other page should leave no doubt that there are no shortcuts.
Currently, many new maintainers seem to have this impression for some
reason. I only they knew how long incomplete submissions will stay in
the queue they would take a second look before hitting OK, I am sure.


> I think if we wanted to have less people apply with projects that do
> not meet the requirements, then at least a link to the requirements
> should be placed on the front page. New users have little to go on
> before they create a log in, as it is required to be authenticated to
> view the /register/ location. For a new user to go through the process
> and then find out about the requirements, might be pretty discouraging
> and therefore taken less seriously.

I agree. If not on the front page, at least on the page a new user would
register. 


> You might want to place strong (bold), big, and emphasis html tags on
> text that link to the requirements.

Actually, I think it is not so much a question of the format but of the
message delivered. If we can get across the message 
"Take your 5 minutes to do a self-critical check of your project or be
prepared to wait 6 weeks" (in a diplomatic way, of course) this would be
beneficial to the approval process a lot.


> Perhaps, you may even go as far as to provide example projects that
> fit the bill.

I once was tempted to do just that. But I decided against it because I 
didn't want people to simply post the same thing without understanding
it (or the reason why). I am still more in favor of a checklist with
nearby explanations of the reasoning.