Hi,
First, I want to raise my hat to LibLime team for the new website.
I also want to thanks Thomas for the time he spent to analyse the new
site and for bringing those worth to discuss points.
Here is, briefly, my comments.
1. LOCALISATION
If we do not make the French (France) link point to
koha-fr.org, I
strongly recommand to remove it until the french version of the site is
almost completed.
Unfortunately, that link is there strictly to allow changing the language of the website from English to French, and any other translation that is added will show up as a link just like the French/English ones. So disabling the language would remove the possibility of translation, that's just how Plone works AFAIK.
3. DEMONSTRATION
I'm aware that the demo site are maintained by LL team, however, since
this is a demo for the community, wouldn't be faire to remove any
reference to LL in the demo site?
This includes the username/password, logo and name. As Thomas
mentionned, it would also be nice if the URLs were using the same
approach as the koha-fr site, I means
something@koha.org
By the way, I just tried the demo site and here what I noted:
- can not log on the intranet using liblime/liblime at the moment (both
public and academic)
The liblime user was deleted by someone who logged into the academic demo as the liblime user ... These demos refresh on a daily basis so the problem would have resolved itself by morning, but in any event, its fixed now. The public demo appears to be working fine.
- there is a 404 when we click Catalogue in the public demo
Yep, that's a broken link, but its otherwise fine.
BTW: nothing has changed with this Plone site with respect to how we demonstrate Koha ... LibLime has been faithfully providing stable, public, free, demos for the community for years. So that's nothing new and I'm not sure how it relates to the website update.
3.2 PAY FOR SUPPORT
Support
companies are listed by the date they joined the Koha community.
I really don't want to remove any credits to LibLime or BibLibre. You
guys are doing awesome job. However, I'm a bit confused about the
contribution part.
As far as I can tell, a contribution should be something that the
company as paid or provide the ressource to do something. Features
developped for and paid by a client shouldn't be considered as a
contribution.
Has contributed over 55% of the entire Koha
codebase, including the integration of Koha and Zebra
Has contributed over 35% of the entire Koha codebase
Was the developpment payed by a client? If so, the client should be
credited for the integrations/development, not LibLime... does it make
sense?
Well, I can't speak for BibLibre, but LibLime does not get paid by clients to contribute back to the Koha community. We don't get paid to maintain those contributions. We don't get paid by clients to write and maintain the free documentation we've maintained for the community, and we don't get paid by clients to hold time-consuming official Koha positions such as Release Manager, Translation Manager and Documentation Manager. LibLime pays those expenses ourselves at considerable cost to us.
Many of the Koha vendors listed on the support page do not contribute 100% of the code they write for customers to the community, and we've learned over the past fwew years that in some cases this is due to them not being paid for that effort, and in other cases, its a deliberate attempt to proprietize components of the services they offer.
LibLime has, from our inception in 2005, contributed back 100% of the code we've created because we believe in the community process and we strive to set an example for other support organizations.
Listing notable contributions by vendors on the support page where applicable is additional incentive for vendors to get more actively involved in contribution. Its important that libraries selecting support options know the roles that their support provider is playing in the community.
In March 2007, LibLime acquired the Koha division of Katipo
Communications, Ltd., the original developers of Koha 1.0.
Not really a contribution... This is marketing stuff and shoud stay on
LibLime website.
That is not meant to be a marketing statement, but rather an explanation of LibLime's listing having been grandfathered from Katipo's Koha Division, which could be confusing to first-time visitors.
the koha-manage group decided to...
What are the factor making for someone to be in the Koha-manage group?
There is no mention of such a group on
koha.org.
My main point here is that the Koha.org website should be as
vendor-independant as possible. I really think that the Alphabetical
order is the best way to reach that goal.
I respectfully disagree. Listing by date joined is the most vendor-independent and community-focused. Another fair option would be to list in order of contributions, most to least. This community is, after all, a meritocracy :).
Here some broken links that I found on the new (now current) web site.
www.koha.org (with www) bring a Zope Quick Start Page...
In the footer: LibLime Link
Support » Free Support » Koha Mailing List
Documentation » Reference Manual » Koha 3.0 or Koha 3.2 » All content
on one page... It takes a long time to load and after a while, it
request to log on our Google Account...
Very helpful, thanks we'll try to locate and fix these asap.
Cheers,
Josh