Quick proposal: discourse UX consistency

Quick proposal:

  • Projects are starting to migrate to discourse: propose a consistent UX experience for forum participants.

Please respond ahead of the marketing meeting this Friday.

Here is the proposed setup:

The system admin committee does not feel equipped to comment on UX experience, and asks for a proposal from the marketing committee. I have written the above after learning about discourse, and trying to determine what is the least bother.

While the motion held open for 2 weeks, new projects are being setup now, so effective feedback needs to be in ahead of Friday marketing meeting.

  • Peter Batty
  • Nicolas Bozon
  • Astrid Emde
  • Jody Garnett +1 initial motion
  • Peter Mooney
  • Laura Mugeha +1
  • Enock Seth Nyamador
  • Adam Steer
  • Guido Stein

Community support:

  • Regina Obe +1
  • Jorge Sanz +1
  • Feedback welcome speak up!

Here are some visual example:

1 Like

Just a note. I do feel while it’s great to propose a UI experience category setup down to project levels, we should delegate to projects for the final decision of how their sub categories are named / slugged etc.

Thanks @robe I will mark subcategory named slugged as optional.

However part of the transition trouble right now is too little guidance. I think having a default recommendation would be very much appreciated.

As example:

  • It was not obvious to me that the category slugs geoserver / user ends up geoserver-user mailing list name unless someone points it out first.
  • It was not until I watched geoserver / geoserver-user get setup that I understood that blindly reusing the name of the mailing list (my first instinct) would result in a poor experience.

Yes agree a default recommendation is great as people don’t know what they don’t know.

I’m not on the list, but I’ll +1 anyways :sweat_smile:

Thanks for working on the proposal @jive. It makes sense to me, and I agree with enforcing the top-level categories and then making the opinionated suggestion of those defaults, leaving projects and initiatives to deviate from it if they see fit.

I don’t really have an opinion on enforcing any color/branding. Still, I’d at least encourage everyone to try to follow standard practice and leverage each project/committee’s existing branding (logos, banners, etc.) to make each forum a bit of its own.

1 Like

Thanks I have updated the proposal with feedback, and noted community support and votes at the top of the ticket.

+1 from me, the proposal and categorization make sense :ok_hand:

+1 from me

+1 for me

Standardizing is always good.
Right now, compared to what can be in the future we are small on discourse

From all the projects: OSgeo projects and Community: we are 5 projects here:
OSGeoLive
pgRouting
GeoNetwork
GeoServer
QGIS
Right now its the time :slight_smile:

The two weeks have now passed and I am going to consider the motion approved.

  • Peter Batty
  • Nicolas Bozon
  • Astrid Emde
  • Jody Garnett +1 initial motion
  • Peter Mooney
  • Laura Mugeha +1
  • Enock Seth Nyamador
  • Adam Steer
  • Guido Stein
  • Scott McHale +1

Community support:

  • Regina Obe +1
  • Jorge Sanz +1
  • Vicky +1

(as we can see from the response this falls in-between marketing and system admin committee “mandate”)

Actions:

  • @robe has continued to experimenting with muting categories in order to provide a better “email mode” experience for those transitioning from mailman; and will provide updated guidance based on experiment and testing.

  • With the motion passed I will work on rearranging the categories as described.