Re: [hylafax-users] new community site

["Darren Nickerson" <darren.nickerson@xxxxxxxx>]

> 1) Commercial content on the hylafax.org site
>
> While the "hardware" box on the main page is marginally OK, the
> information on the "Support" page is clearly inappropriate for a ".org"
> site.  It speaks in the first person ("we can help you there too!") as if
> ifax.com IS the hylafax community and that there are no other choices for
> support.

We're more than happy to change that. Can you propose a way for us to put
something there that would include our offerings among those of others? I
think it's useful to have a list of consultants for people to reach out to,
and I think some of the language there will help educate people to the
availability of support options ... we started the TechSupport page on the
wiki for that reason as a stop-gap measure until the new site was live. I
like Lee's approach on his support page, but I'd rather people not have to
use the mailing lists to solicit proposals, I'd prefer them to have the
information for a direct approach.

As I mentioned previously, anything like this on the new site will be
editable, or at least there will be a fair, democratic way for people to get
themselves on that page. But in the short term, perhaps we can just point
them to the wiki page for their options and remove anything iFAX specific?

This is exactly the type of thing that, if proposed on devel, could have
been (would have been) changed, and thanks for bringing it up.


> The current text makes it look like iFax.com _benefits_ from the
> open-source version of Hylafax being difficult to use and support.  Now,
> I've worked with Darren in the past, and found him to be very helpful
> solving open-source Hylafax problems, and in setting up the wiki, etc.
> However, that doesn't change the _appearance_ created by the support page.


We'll see what we can do to improve that for you!


> 2) Slow releases
>
> My client has unforunately abandoned the HylaFAX releases, and we now
> build RPMs from CVS HEAD whenever there's an update we need.  This has
> even required emails to the list and directly to Lee asking, "Is CVS HEAD
> currently stable enough to deploy?"  It's simply not reasonable to have 8+
> months between releases and consider this an active project.

To be fair, not all releases have been that slow. But by all means, let's
have a productive discussion on how to accelerate releases on -devel. As you
know, anyone can call for a release at any time, so how about you just come
and tell us to cut one! ;-) Thus far, the discussions have supported the
beta, beta, beta, release candicate, release type of process, and perhaps
the gap between them can be shortened to days/hours instead of weeks.
Whatever we do, let's make sure not to compromise quality much (if at all).

> 3) Stale content on the hylafax.org site
>
> The FAQ was updated in 2003, the latest press release is 2002, 18 dead
> links on the Links page, Troubleshooting last updated in 2002.  This
> complaint, I believe, is not disputable.

Absolutely. No excuses, except to say that we haven't had any volunteers
lately to add content, that iFAX itself has not ever focused on adding
content (or claimed to). We host the website, but we don't author it. That
said, there has been work underway to completely abandon the old site and
make it easier for those few volunteers who do come along to add/revise. I
hope you will agree Lee's How-To was a fine addition to the site, and it was
welcomed just as any other contributions would have been. We'll try to think
of how to encourage more contributions in the future, but for now,
recognizing that people aren't flocking in droves to write a website, iFAX
has committed to a real, meaningful content revamp from the ground up, has
all the hardware and connectivity in place already, and has the new site in
the planning stage as announced. A process which we are clearly doing in
consultation with the community, since we recently asked for
comments/suggestions for the new site.

> 4) Limitations of iFax.com's community support
>
> Let's face it: Sourceforge raised the bar for open-source community sites
> and tools.  It is completely possible for an open-source project to get
> better hosting, bug tracking, releases, testing environments, etc. at
> sf.net than can be built and supported by your average "commercial
> sponsor."  Moving to sf.net is an excellent idea that should be discussed.

I'd prefer to have this discussion after we've had a chance to showcase what
we've already been concepting out and developing. I'll see what I can do to
accelerate the go-live date for you.

Thanks for your comments!

-Darren


____________________ HylaFAX(tm) Users Mailing List _______________________
 To subscribe/unsubscribe, click http://lists.hylafax.org/cgi-bin/lsg2.cgi
On UNIX: mail -s unsubscribe hylafax-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxx < /dev/null
 *To learn about commercial HylaFAX(tm) support, mail sales@xxxxxxxxx*