#28 New website has almost no information on joining the Fedora community?
Opened 2 years ago by ankursinha. Modified a year ago

I love the new website. However, would it please be possible to put more focus on the community? It is currently delegated to the footer---the community is the more important bit---the editions may change, the software does change, but it is the community that constantly remains.

So, could this bit be expanded on, for example?

Fedora is always free for anyone to use, modify, and distribute.
It is built and used by people across the globe who work together as a community.

How about "Learn how you can join the community!" -> link to wcidff or wiki/join?

While this evidence is purely anecdotal from interactions with users on AskFedora, it seems that users have no information at all on how the community runs, and how the products we provide are created. They think "someone, somewhere" is doing the work, and a lot of them think someone is being paid to do so---as if we follow a vendor <-> user model like indistry.

It is therefore, not surprising that inspite of all our efforts to improve the on-boarding process, we do not gain too many contributors. So, having information on our primary web resource would be a good start.


just the history of why things are the way they are right now for context:

getfedora.org is for users trying to obtain copies of fedora.
fedoraproject.org is for the community. right now it redirects to getfedora.org (it should probably redirect to the wiki?) the original plan was for fedoraproject.org to be the domain for Fedora Hubs, but the project is basically dead right now.

Like most people, I'm very sorry Hubs was shelved. We were really looking forward to it. :disappointed:

In the meantime, the problem remains: most people outside the community think of Fedora merely as an OS, not as a FOSS community. Off the top of my head, I think something of this type would be really nice:

  • Hello! We are Fedora! We do cool stuff to promote FOSS. Learn about our mission and how we go about it here! Why not join us?
  • Look! These different OS variants are some cool things the Fedora community has come up with! Give them a go!

What do you think?

We're really not just a vendor community that packages software. By only focussing on that one aspect, we are really underselling our mission statement along with all the great work that community members do.

Metadata Update from @codeblock:
- Issue tagged with: content

2 years ago

I agree with @ankursinha here. If we don't have a plan with dates for updating our websites, especially now that hubs is no more, we should start to incorporate our community into getfedora.org. I believe we not only want software users, we want community members.

we could make fpo into a static community portal and keep get as a brochure and have crosslinks. i think that would make the most sense esp given get was just refreshed

by community portal i mean something like this https://activate.mozilla.community/

@ankursinha the problem with putting stuff about how to join fedora on getfedora.org that right now that story is a mess. join.fpo points to a wiki page, and the chances of success going through that page are pretty slim; i feel terrible firing people up about our mission (which i am assuming is documented well somewhere) to only have things fall flat and have them endure a terrible experience in trying to join. it would be a major undertaking to fix that that would involve a lot more than adding text and links to a pre-existing website.

I am also not sure pointing would-be contributors at the various form of Fedora that are downloadable is going to be productive if #1 the maintainers of said images/variants aren't prepared for that #2 there isn't anything specific or actionable they can do from that review that we can handle. we need to get really specific with maintainers about what would actually be useful for new contributors to do in order for this to work.

Without some kind of framework to manage the above, honestly, at this point if someone wants to get involve the best experience for them would be to apply for an internship through one of the many programs we participate in, because then they'll be assigned a mentor and have a well-defined project to work on with assistance and resources and they'll actually get somewhere.

If there are existing frameworks / processes / etc along the lines of the internsihps that we could highlight, then that could make sense. E.g. maybe the ambassador process makes sense. But I understand that is abused sometimes too. So strategically some decisions have to be made, and resources committed. This might need to be escalated to the council.

Just a note here too (not to distract from the above discussion), but the old getfedora had just about the same amount of information as the new site. Purely noting this to point out that this is not a regression on what we had before for a few years.

https://web.archive.org/web/20190508183933/https://getfedora.org/

we could make fpo into a static community portal and keep get as a brochure and have crosslinks. i think that would make the most sense esp given get was just refreshed

That sounds great. How would we go about that please?

by community portal i mean something like this https://activate.mozilla.community/

I'd even settle for something less fancy tbh. Just a static brochure thing like get but focussed on community would work.

@ankursinha the problem with putting stuff about how to join fedora on getfedora.org that right now that story is a mess. join.fpo points to a wiki page, and the chances of success going through that page are pretty slim; i feel terrible firing people up about our mission (which i am assuming is documented well somewhere) to only have things fall flat and have them endure a terrible experience in trying to join. it would be a major undertaking to fix that that would involve a lot more than adding text and links to a pre-existing website.

I am also not sure pointing would-be contributors at the various form of Fedora that are downloadable is going to be productive if #1 the maintainers of said images/variants aren't prepared for that #2 there isn't anything specific or actionable they can do from that review that we can handle. we need to get really specific with maintainers about what would actually be useful for new contributors to do in order for this to work.
Without some kind of framework to manage the above, honestly, at this point if someone wants to get involve the best experience for them would be to apply for an internship through one of the many programs we participate in, because then they'll be assigned a mentor and have a well-defined project to work on with assistance and resources and they'll actually get somewhere.
If there are existing frameworks / processes / etc along the lines of the internsihps that we could highlight, then that could make sense. E.g. maybe the ambassador process makes sense. But I understand that is abused sometimes too. So strategically some decisions have to be made, and resources committed. This might need to be escalated to the council.

I understand all this, especially the need to have a common framework. While commops has worked on improving the onboarding-process for various teams (@jflory7 and @bt0dotninja can provide details), I don't think we have the man power to do this in a way that involves the whole community at a council level (I certainly don't, and so I won't suggest it).

In my tiny head, if people don't learn about the community, joining it won't even occur to them. As an example, from what I read on the new Ask Fedora, our "userbase" still treats us like vendors who provide software. We're not a software vendor---we're not nvidia, we don't make profits and use those to hire more machinery and people to provide better services to our "users" to further make more profits. We deal in "people power" as a resource currency. Software is our way of promoting our mission. But there's not enough out there for people outside the community bubble to learn what the community is about and what model we follow.

So, for now can we reduce the scope of this ticket and say "how can we provide more information on the community?" and leave out the "joining the community" part entirely? Would that help us come up with something for fp.o? If nothing else, it'd make our "users" aware that we're a community driven project whose goal is to promote FOSS, not a vendor that provides software (clearly this has begun to really irk me :laughing: ). So, not "what can I do for Fedora", but rather "what is Fedora?" Why are we taking time out of our busy lives to do all this? When that message is clearer to our userbase---people not well versed with FOSS---then maybe we can think of how we help them contribute.

Here's a related ticket on updating the orgchart: https://pagure.io/mindshare/issue/135

The mission and the org chart are both currently buried in docs:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/#_what_is_fedora_all_about
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/orgchart/

Can we maybe put this info on fp.o instead?

I'm only trying to get at the low-hanging fruits here with small tasks that have low organisational/planning requirements. Examples:

@ankursinha right now getfedora.org has a community links section, one of which is About Fedora that points to this:

https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/

This seems to be the sort of info you're wanting to see, right? So is the low hanging fruit just a way of somehow elevating that content?

@ankursinha right now getfedora.org has a community links section, one of which is About Fedora that points to this:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/

This seems to be the sort of info you're wanting to see, right? So is the low hanging fruit just a way of somehow elevating that content?

Yes, I think that would be good start to make IMO. Where getfedora focusses on our products and links to communtiy, something that does the opposite, focusses on community and links to our products, maybe at fp.o would be very nice.

Edit: the link is currently in the footer under a "community" section. If the link can be moved to the bit where we say "It is built and used by people across the globe who work together as a community." or where we say "Welcome to Freedom" (since that connects with our mission), that would be nicer. I really don't think people pay much attention to footers. It's always struck me as "extra information like the sitemap and copyright and things that no one ever needs to look at".

Is this open to be worked upon?

Login to comment on this ticket.

Metadata