Feedback gathered for fedoraproject.org and get.fedoraproject.org

[Mark]

On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 6:28 PM, Mark<markg85 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2009/7/11 Mel Chua <mel at redhat.com>:
>> Thanks for pushing back and pointing out holes in my reasoning, btw - always
>> good especially when it's 3:20am (...it's one of Those Nights when I can't
>> sleep).
>>
>>> We really should just format the site differently - at the very least
>>> have a different style sheet - to target this specifically if we decide
>>> to support it. We don't officially now.
>>
>> Yay! wontfix, then. *docs at
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Websites/Heuristics#Screen_size*
>>
>>>> "some people will already come to fp.o knowing that they want to dl
>>>> Fedora, even before taking the tour. Who are they?"
>>>>
>>>> * someone (I trust, possibly an Ambassador standing beside me) has
>>>> already told me I should just download this "Fedora" thing and they'll help
>>>> me get started
>>>>
>>>> * I do understand what I'd be getting; I already know what Fedora is and
>>>> just need to grab an image file and am easily frustrated by Fitt's Law
>>>>
>>>> * some people blithely click on download links first, then figure out
>>>> what they're getting afterwards. Not that it's a good idea, mind you... but
>>>> I've watched enough people have this as almost a knee-jerk reaction to a
>>>> webpage that... I mean, it happens.
>>>
>>> I agree with all of this, although i think the last two cases are far
>>> less common than the first.
>>
>> I wonder if "IP addresses that have dl'd one of the prior Fedora releases
>> before" vs "IP addresses that have not downloaded Fedora before" would be a
>> useful differentiation metric for this - it's hard to tell who's actually
>> arriving at the site for what. I'll have a chat with Ian (since he's doing
>> similar work) about ways we might instrument things up better to get the
>> kind of data these discussions should be based on... who else is into stats
>> and metrics?
>>
>> --Mel
>>
>
> Oke, great feedback on the feedback (although i seem to miss feedback
> on the bottom part right after: "Mixed from: UxerX and UserY (and
> others)")...
> So some thoughts on that would be nice.
>
> Now for the feedback and what we do/won't do.. i suggest we use some
> kind of system for that (MoSCoW)..
> So, if we could all (Máirín, Mel, Hiemanshu and me) could all make a
> MoSCow list of what we see as needed then discuss the lists in the
> meeting next friday?
> Just if you don't know what moscow is:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MoSCoW_Method
>
> note: every line from:
> http://fedora.mageprojects.com/fedora_feedback_anonymized.txt is a
> problem or a possible solution that the users saw. so every line
> should come back in one of the moscow sections (not multiple!).
>
> So in the end we end up with at least 4 lists with the following subjects:
>
> Must have
> ----------------------
> < your items here >
>
> Could have
> ----------------------
> < your items here >
>
> Should have
> ----------------------
> < your items here >
>
> Won't have
> ----------------------
> < your items here >
>
> And if you ask me as soon as we know the "Must have" part we can
> actually start to make something.
> Let me know what you think of this idea.
>
> Mark.
>

So, are we going to do this or not?