From The Document Foundation Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents Box

  • 1.1 Remove "Employment-office-like".
  • 1.1.4 and 1.1.5 Remove "Needed".
  • 1.1.6 Replace all with "Work Flow".
  • 1.1.7 Replace with "Classification of Requests".
  • Replace with "Primary Classification".
  • Replace with "Secondary Classification".
  • 1.1.8 Clumsy title - reconsider wording.
  • 1.1.9 Replace with "Completion Bounties".
  • 1.1.10 Replace with "Strengths and Weaknesses".

Proposal Summary

  • Replace "meet each other" with "be organised".
  • Remove ", much like an employment office" (since organisation of employment offices around the world differ considerably.


  • 1 Replace "Centralization of the demand for help from different current project maintainers and core contributors to thereby avoid fragmentation based on native languages and project niches;" with "Centralisation of demands for help in current projects by maintainers and contributors. This should avoid fragmentation due to language differences and project isolation."
  • 2 Replace "the external will to contribute" with "contributions".

Needed Manpower and Roles

This table seems to need more careful consideration and is presently not clear or consistent.

[Proposal author's note: the proposal is still in a initial state and it needs more collective discussion bout Manpower and roles - Date: 2011-05-23]

Workflow After Implementation [Remove "of the Tool"]

  • Remove "wannabe".
[Proposal author's note: I'd prefer to keep "wannabe" in order to make a clear distinction beetween potential/new contributors and current ones - Date: 2011-05-23]
  • Replace "communicate" with "communicates".

Primary Classification of Tasks

  • Again, remove "wannabe".
  • Replace "dev" with "development".

Secondary Classification of Tasks

Again, remove "wannabe".

Granularity of Classification of the Requests for Help

Again, remove "wannabe".


Finally, if we are to provide documents in English (as I hope we are) then we must decide to adopt either British English (used in this discussion), International English (where for example we would write "centralisation" as in British English) or American English as used in this document (where for example we would write "centralization").

It would be my sincere hope that we would adopt either British English, or failing that International English and should avoid over-Americanisation. I do, however, accept and understand that spell-checkers are often default set to American English rather than any other.

[Proposal author's note: Well, I'm not enough skilled in distinguishing American and International English, so feel free to give homogeneity to the text where needed - Date: 2011-05-23]