Re: [seul-edu] ISO Phase 1 evals

[Doug Loss <drloss@suscom.net>]

Jim Thomas wrote:

> Here are some theories about why you've not gotten a good response
> on this yet.
>

Thanks for the comments, Jim!

>
> 1) I poked around looking for a way to review an app, but I couldn't
> find it.  I could read plenty of reviews - I just couldn't see how
> to write one.  Perhaps I'm not alone in this.   Are reviewers
> supposed to just mail their reviews to the list or what?
>

Yes, just mail the phase one evals to the list.  The guidelines for that
were part of an earlier message I referred to in the first message in
this thread.  The reviews attached to each app are intended for a
different purpose, to give the casual browser of the index some idea of
what others think of the app.  Having said that, I'll have to look into
how reviews get added to the records.  Oh, Les?

>
> 2) You've called for teachers and adminstrators to review the
> packages.  I assume that by "administrator" you mean "someone
> involved in school government" rather than a sysadmin at a school.
> Since I'm the latter and not the former, I took this to mean that
> I'm not the right person for the job.  I DID however, wish to review
> squid+squidguard,  since I'm responsible for deploying it at my
> school.
>

Yes, I did mean the school gov't type of administrator.  However, your
point about the technology administrator is well taken.  Feel free to
eval those type of apps :-).

>
> Actually, this sort of confusion over the meaning of
> "administration" has crept into the index itself.  What is being
> administered?  The school or the computers?  Two very different
> categories of people do these two things.  The "Administrative"
> category has both types of apps.  Perhaps it would be better to have
> separate "School Administration" and "Computer/Network
> Adminstration" categories.
>

The Administrative category is much to large and amorphous, and needs to
be subdivided into more precise, smaller categories.  If you or anyone
else wants to suggest such subdivisions, I'll be more than happy to see
them.

>
> 3) You said it'd be better if the reviewer was not a techie.
> Perhaps the majority of this list's readers are techies?  We techies
> were instructed to ask actual, bona-fide, teachers or
> "adminstrators" (see point 2) to review the software, which leads me
> to number 4:
>

I think there's a sizable contingent of working teachers on this list.
At least I hope so.

>
> 4) Since school is out, I rarely see teachers.
>

Outreach, outreach, outreach!  I'll bet some of the teachers from your
school even have telephones!  Ask around; surely someone from the school
would be intrigued about the chance to see and evaluate the software
that's available for Linux.

>
> Please understand that the reason I wrote this was to be
> constructive!  I'm very much looking forward to
> seeing/using/promoting the ISO, and helping out when we get to a
> "techie" phase (or sooner if I've misunderstood).

I never had any doubt, Jim.

--
How valuable is my contribution?
Share your feedback at Affero:
http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=drloss

Doug Loss                 All I want is a warm bed
Data Network Coordinator  and a kind word and
Bloomsburg University     unlimited power.
dloss@bloomu.edu                Ashleigh Brilliant