623
edits
Communication channels analysis: Difference between revisions
Communication channels analysis (view source)
Revision as of 19:51, 13 September 2010
, 13 years agosome more on the bottom ones
Harry Wood (talk | contribs) (more about mailing mailing lists) |
Harry Wood (talk | contribs) (some more on the bottom ones) |
||
|
=== IRC ===
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IRC#IRC - Chat rooms. There's quite a lot of possible chat rooms listed. You can actually spawn a new chat room just be entering a different name, so there's nothing to stop new ones being added to the list, but #osm, #osm-dev, #osm-de are the ones with some traffic. They function reasonably well as a place for newbies to ask questions, but whether newbies feel invited to do so is another question. Some similar problems with other channels with individual users talking too much
=== opengeodata blog ===
''Question: Is this domain name still owned by Steve Coast?''
=== foundation blog ===
http://blog.osmfoundation.org/ - A grand total of two blog posts. We need to take a decision to revive this as meaningful blog or decommission it. At one stage there were some complaints that OpenGeoData.org was owned by Steve Coast, and this is not appropriate as the main blog of OpenStreetMap. The OSMF blog may have been set up as a reaction to that. ''Grant set it up. We should ask him about it.''
=== foundation wiki ===
http://www.osmfoundation.org/ ''We should talk with Grant about this (he set up the wiki)''. As discussed, MediaWiki was probably as a simple CMS choice for the foundation site, but looking so similar to wiki.openstreetmap.org creates confusion. We don't want to confusingly duplicate content of the main wiki, but we also don't want to aim to grow content in the same way. We don't really want a wiki-style sprawling knowledgebase on the foundation site. It's more of a CMS situation, than a knowledgebase situation. Maybe we should move a way from using a wiki (e.g. drupal or wordpress instead) Where wiki style collaboration is useful, we could use the main wiki. Alternatively if we stick with MediaWiki, we should at least make the wiki look very different from the main wiki (skin). Perhaps think about non-open permissions.
| |||