Tony Mechelynck [:tonymec] Reporter
	Description • 13 years ago

This is, I suppose, a followup, not a duplicate, to bug 647913.

On the "new" site, https://wiki.mozilla.org/Evangelism , I don't see any obvious link to a "modern" version of "what to do when filing and following Tech Evangelism issues", for which http://www.mozilla.org/projects/tech-evangelism/site/procedures.html used to be an excellent tutorial.

This page, however, has now been archived and bears a warning banner about it being out of date.
- If the procedures haven't changed since the page was archived, some equivalent page without the warning banner should be made easily available. In the meantime (as a triager) I'll still point reporters of bugs which require evangelization to this possibly outdated but still IMHO very useful document.
- If the procedures _have_ changed, then the new procedures should be documented and made easily discoverable, both by an obvious link from https://wiki.mozilla.org/Evangelism and, I suppose, as a redirect from http://www.mozilla.org/projects/tech-evangelism/site/procedures.html

	David Boswell
	Comment 1 • 13 years ago

I'll be happy to help change redirects around if better documentation exists or is created so people no longer see the page with the archive banner.

Tony, maybe this is a good bug to mark as mentored if you're interested in helping someone go through the process of updating this information?

https://wiki.mozilla.org/Mentors

	Tony Mechelynck [:tonymec] Reporter
	Comment 2 • 13 years ago

(In reply to David Boswell from comment #1)
What would I need to do? I'm willing to work on this bug myself, but:
- I know Wikimedia markup and "static" HTML 4 but I have only the barest knowledge of javascript and none at all of php, cgi, etc.
- I don't know if these policies are still current or, if not, what the current policies are
- I have a wiki.mozilla.org account but if the final version of the page needs to go elsewhere I would have to request "checkin-needed" from someone else, from you maybe? (in particular, for the possible redirect).

	David Boswell
	Comment 3 • 13 years ago

If you're interested in taking this bug and have questions, then I'll add myself as mentor and will be happy to help you.

> - I know Wikimedia markup and "static" HTML 4 but I have only the barest knowledge > of javascript and none at all of php, cgi, etc.

Wiki markup and HTML are all that are needed here, I think.

> I don't know if these policies are still current or, if not, what the current 
> policies are

For archiving policies, the procedure has been to move unowned and out of date pages to the archive site.  If you want to own these pages then we can migrate this content off the archive site and to a better location.

> I have a wiki.mozilla.org account but if the final version of the page needs to 
> go elsewhere I would have to request "checkin-needed" from someone else, from you 
> maybe? (in particular, for the possible redirect).

If putting this content on wiki.m.o makes sense then that's great.  Feel free to copy the archive content, set up new pages as needed on the wiki or add to existing pages and when you're ready I can change the redirects as needed.

	Tony Mechelynck [:tonymec] Reporter
	Comment 4 • 13 years ago

(In reply to David Boswell from comment #3)
> If you're interested in taking this bug and have questions, then I'll add
> myself as mentor and will be happy to help you.

Great.

[...]
> For archiving policies, the procedure has been to move unowned and out of
> date pages to the archive site.  If you want to own these pages then we can
> migrate this content off the archive site and to a better location.

I'm not sure I'm the right owner for those pages: I mean, if there's someone at Mozilla who decides evangelism policies, not only it isn't me but I don't know who it might be.

Even the "new" Evangelism front page, https://wiki.mozilla.org/Evangelism , has a bold line at top (but not as bang-in-the-face as at archive.m.o) saying that it is obsolete.

> 
> > I have a wiki.mozilla.org account but if the final version of the page needs to 
> > go elsewhere I would have to request "checkin-needed" from someone else, from you 
> > maybe? (in particular, for the possible redirect).
> 
> If putting this content on wiki.m.o makes sense then that's great.  Feel
> free to copy the archive content, set up new pages as needed on the wiki or
> add to existing pages and when you're ready I can change the redirects as
> needed.

I suppose that as a first step I could copy the archived page to some subpage of that wikimo "Evangelism" page, [[Evangelism/Procedures]] maybe, and hope that someone will, as the Wikimedia saying goes, "ruthlessly edit" the page to bring it up-to-date?

I'm adding to the CC of this bug the guy who did most of the edits on that wikimo evangelism front page (and thanks to the Bugzilla team for CC autocomplete, a few years ago I'd have had to ask if you (David) knew his Bugzilla handle). Christopher, comments welcome. :-)

	Paul Rouget [:paul]
	Comment 5 • 13 years ago

(In reply to Tony Mechelynck [:tonymec] from comment #4)
> (In reply to David Boswell from comment #3)
> > If you're interested in taking this bug and have questions, then I'll add
> > myself as mentor and will be happy to help you.
> 
> Great.
> 
> [...]
> > For archiving policies, the procedure has been to move unowned and out of
> > date pages to the archive site.  If you want to own these pages then we can
> > migrate this content off the archive site and to a better location.
> 
> I'm not sure I'm the right owner for those pages: I mean, if there's someone
> at Mozilla who decides evangelism policies, not only it isn't me but I don't
> know who it might be.

Stormy Peter or Christian Heilmann?

	Tony Mechelynck [:tonymec] Reporter
	Comment 6 • 13 years ago

OK. I've converted the file to wiki markup and uploaded it to a temporary location, namely https://wiki.mozilla.org/User:Tonymec/Evangelism_procedures (it is not practical to attach a page in wiki markup to Bugzilla, and this way it is ready to be moved to its final location).

Additional pages will be necessary, I haven't yet looked at them. Some of the bold text strings in the above page are actually placeholders for relative URLs in the original. This is intentional and temporary.

Whom should I contact for a preliminary review? dboswell? blizzard? Someone else?

	David Boswell
	Comment 7 • 13 years ago

> Whom should I contact for a preliminary review?

Like Paul suggests in comment #5, I'd contact Christian or Stormy as a starting point.  The Developer Engagement team is probably the closest to the old Tech Evangelism effort, so that would be a good place to start.

	Tony Mechelynck [:tonymec] Reporter
	Comment 8 • 13 years ago

(In reply to David Boswell from comment #7)
> > Whom should I contact for a preliminary review?
> 
> Like Paul suggests in comment #5, I'd contact Christian or Stormy as a
> starting point.  The Developer Engagement team is probably the closest to
> the old Tech Evangelism effort, so that would be a good place to start.

Well, IIUC they were added to the Cc 3 minutes before comment #5, so they ought to get bugmail for this bug.

Christian, Stormy, I'm waiting for your comments, either in this bug or on the talk page of the wikimo page mentioned at comment #6. Don't hesitate to criticize: from my POV, anything is better than dead silence. ;-)

	Christian Heilmann
	Comment 9 • 13 years ago

There is a lot of stuff in there I never seen before and I don't quite understand. What is the Mozilla Evangelism Letters? 

It seems that this is an older procedure that has not much to do with the tech evangelism we do these days. 

What is the purpose of this procedure? Complain when external sites don't support Firefox? List internal bugs on sites that need upgrading?

Can we set up a quick chat about this (maybe at the all-hands) as simply getting CC-ed on a bug in bugzilla is not effective when you get hundreds of mails a day. 

It seems there is an already working process in place and I'd love to see how we can mesh it what we are doing.

	David Boswell
	Comment 10 • 13 years ago

(In reply to Christian Heilmann from comment #9)
> It seems that this is an older procedure that has not much to do with the
> tech evangelism we do these days. 
> 
> What is the purpose of this procedure? Complain when external sites don't
> support Firefox? List internal bugs on sites that need upgrading?

I wasn't directly involved in this effort, so might know all the relevant information.  I believe this was an effort some years ago to provide a toolkit for people to reach out to sites that didn't support Firefox and encourage them to reconsider how their sites were coded.

	Tony Mechelynck [:tonymec] Reporter
	Comment 11 • 13 years ago

Yes, Tech Evangelism, the way I understand it, is what to do when a site uses broken or proprietary code which doesn't properly support Gecko; in the past (before the introduction of general.useragent.compatMode.firefox), sites which sniffed the UA for "Firefox" and rejected SeaMonkey would also be evangelized. Some bugs which had been reported for SeaMonkey::General ("I cannot display www.foobar.net correctly") then moved, maybe, to Core::Layout or Core::Javascript Engine, would sometimes be moved again to Tech Evangelism ("the site is broken, let's get them to fix it") rather than RESOLVED INVALID ("it's no bug of Mozilla, I wash my hands of it").

The page, even in its outdated state, still includes valuable information IMHO — the best I could find — and in particular, it mentions that it's better to try and get the webmasters in question to clean up their act via a personalized customer complaint rather than rely on "the Mozilla guys will do it for me". It also displays in a neat way, easily understandable by the greenest novice, the main Bugzilla fields and how they are (or were) used for evangelism purposes.

I suppose we could set up "a quick chat" about this, but the question is when. I live in Brussels (Belgium), time zone +0200 in North-hemisphere summer (or +0100 in winter), and even though I don't constantly watch IRC, I usually leave ChatZilla open when I'm connected. You can ping me on moznet, and if I'm at the keyboard I'll answer; or we could fix a time spot in advance — probably not today (Thursday) though, or only in late afternoon or evening my time. Or else, if your bugmail gets lost too easily, we could discuss the question on the talk page, https://wiki.mozilla.org/index.php?title=User_talk:Tonymec/Evangelism_procedures — assuming of course that you have a MozillaWiki account.

	Stormy Peters
	Comment 12 • 13 years ago

Did this discussion happen at all-hands? This is a real problem again with Firefox Mobile ...

	Tony Mechelynck [:tonymec] Reporter
	Comment 13 • 13 years ago

(In reply to Stormy Peters from comment #12)
> Did this discussion happen at all-hands? This is a real problem again with
> Firefox Mobile ...

I don't know, I wasn't there, but if it did, I'd like what came out of it.

	Tony Mechelynck [:tonymec] Reporter
	Comment 14 • 13 years ago

oops: I'd like _to know_ what came out of it.

	Tony Mechelynck [:tonymec] Reporter
	Comment 15 • 12 years ago

I completely forgot about this bug. I think it would be better for somebody else to tackle it (or not). The "temporary" page mentioned in comment #6 is still there.

	David Boswell
	Comment 16 • 12 years ago

(In reply to Tony Mechelynck [:tonymec] from comment #15)
> I completely forgot about this bug. I think it would be better for somebody
> else to tackle it (or not). The "temporary" page mentioned in comment #6 is
> still there.

I'm happy to help anyone who wants to take this if it's still relevant.  Maybe someone from Developer Engagement would want to take this?

FWIW, I had removed myself as mentor for the bug since I don't think we want new webdev volunteers getting up to speed on the legacy version of www.mozilla.org.

	Stormy Peters
	Comment 17 • 12 years ago

We are working on this for Firefox Mobile. Ali Spivak or Jean-Yves Perrier can probably take this one.