Make Drupal.org user profiles more robust

Looking good!

Do you have a source to share, we can help with finalizing it.

Just to be clear, since I think this is what #4 in Remaining Tasks says, the badge icons in the prototype are temporary?

Yes, these icons are temporary. We will need to find someone who can create the required icons.

Can we get screenshots without the little annotation markers. They will probably distract people. There is a button to turn them off on the axshare.com site. I tried doing it myself, but, for some reason, parts of the page are not coming out right when I try to capture the whole page.

how should we make comments? here in the issue or on the axshare page?

Good to see a concrete proposal in two possible versions.

Overall:

-
- What's the rationale for a 3 column layout? Not sure that would work in the current 960 fixed width setup we have and overall I don't really think it makes for an easier to scan page
- Related to that: gotta think about how to make this responsive as well.

Non-code contributor:

- Don't think a map of such a small size will be useful/readable
- In the right column the "personal interest, industries, companies" items look like they are part of "My Drupal activity". The "Interests and specialties" header isn't that visible (too small and overpowered by the association logo?)
- The grid layout for contribution badges looks uneven, I'd probably lay that part out as an easier to scan list, with smaller icons

Code contributor

- I'm missing the 'My Drupal activity" header here. Wouldn't the "My projects" section be part of that?
- Similar to contribution badges, the event logos section looks uneven, images too big, uneven layout
- Not sure there have to be "And X more…" links to expand certain sections. Simply showing everything should work for most profiles?

Although there are more clearly identifiable sections in this proposal, I'm not yet sure that it all is more better organized now. I would problably start exploring with turning the left column info into a top section for the center column:

Thanks for getting this ball rolling!

I can help with icons and creating icon fonts or SVG, whatever is needed. Is there anyone in those related tasks right now?

SVG should be used over icon fonts. We have SVG in a few places on Drupal.org, and it is working well.

@drumm second that.

Since #2161929: Add a profile field for GitHub account. came up, and the links to profiles on other sites will be relatively straightforward, I think those will be done relatively early.

We should use existing icons, no need to re-create Twitter/Gittip/etc icons. They do need to be licensed in a way that checking them into a GPL v2+ repository, http://cgit.drupalcode.org/drupalorg/tree/drupalorg/images, is legal.

Excellent. It's important to remember to not focus on getting it perfect.

Let's make some suggestions (great ones thus far), see what users do & iterate.

I like Angie's "Fun moments in my Drupal history..." section of her profile. Not only is it informative for other users, it seems like a great place for her to easily track her Drupal career path.

Maybe we could encourage this community-wide by adding a simple "My Drupal Timeline" field widget to the "Drupal" tab of the "Edit profile" page.

Something simple, like she has:
| Date: | Link to Activity |
Add another item

The bonus of capturing this data in dedicated fields rather than just in the Bio longtext field, of course, is that d.o will be able to do all sorts of fun things with it later on down the road. :o)

Agree with ronaldmulero
Nice to have some personal writeup by the user - especially if it can be sorted/ analysed etc.

The Drupal Role(s) to me is somewhat less important than the My Contributions. I would swap their places . Otherwise really great. (And it's just awesome that webchick is the textbook case of the contributors :D )

This looks really great! In general it's not really possible to make the profile pages look worse than the huge parking lot of link cruft they are now, but this prototype goes way above and beyond "make it not suck" to "make me actually want to visit these." Great job! :D

A few comments, these are pretty detail-focused because I normally come at mockups as someone who has to implement them, and it's a hard habit to break. :P

Overall

- (nitpick) You use "I/me" language in some places ("Find me online") and third-person elsewhere ("Companies worked for"). These should probably be made consistent.
- Along the top, "Forum posts" is mis-named. This is actually forum post, issues, book pages, showcases, and all other manner of things. Unless you're suggesting limiting it to *just* forum posts, but in that case we also need "My documentation" or whatever + continue doing this every time we add a new content type.
- Another popular feature request which we probably don't want to tackle at the same time, but should allow for it in the future, is the ability to call out "How to support me financially" in some way. See for example the "Contribute" button on https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/idderall/

Find me online block

- Speaking of which, "Find me online" sounds a little bit cheesy to me. :) We're all "online" these days. "About me" is fine. It's not a big deal though.
- Although, now that I say that, it's a bit weird that my picture is so disconnected from my name in terms of proximity. So maybe "About Angela Byron"?
- I'd like to not lose the links on fields like gender, country, etc. I use them frequently for community stats tracking. This is probably just an omitted detail from the prototype, but just in case, wanted to call it out.
- I really like the little "other services" icons. That's a great + visual way to consolidate that pile of links. We will eventually run out of horizontal space there so we'll want to watch that a bit, but I suppose they could always stack into a second row if so.
- Nice that you've accounted for the fact that some people don't have their contact forms enabled.
- Agreed with yoroy that the map looks too tiny to be useful. It's a cool idea, though. Wonder if it could be made to work with a little extra room, but then worried about the prominence off-set. Hm.
- "My projects" feels a bit out of place here, especially when non-code contributors won't have it. Seems like that better belongs with "Drupal stuff."
- Small, out of scope feature request: Order "My projects" by most recently committed to vs. # of commits. I can see getting pinged about Quiz, Organic Groups, or Revision Moderation modules when I haven't committed to any of then in 4+ years.

About block

- I really don't like the meshing of my work life with my community life seamlessly in this way. "Director of Community Development" isn't how I label myself in the Drupal community at all; it's just a title Dries and I came up with because I had to be "director of something" at Acquia. :) Seems to me like that should either be a separate "Short description" field or whatever that people can populate however they want, or we should add a distinct heading above this entire section that this is "Work stuff." But if it's "work stuff" I don't know that it deserves such prominence... My d.o profile is definitely "community first, work second" and I know there are numerous others out there like me. (But I don't want to presume that's true for everyone, either; I'm sure for freelancers or whatever they'd want this info to be very prominent.) Something like "Short description" lets people put whatever they'd like in here. (For me, I'd probably put something like "Drupal core committer, cat herder, Acquian, DA board member" or whatever.)
- It's especially problematic when you start smooshing one's "current organizations" into a single comma-separated field like that, without any label to explain what that is.
- It seemed weird to have a big heading "Drupal role(s)" and then "member for / documentation" below it. I would think that "Member for" would be part of "About" and "1000 edits" would be a badge down below.

My contributions block

- While I'm flattered people like my timeline and want to structure it more, that seems like it'd be a huge pile of work, not only to do but also to fill out, and I can't think of anything we'd do with such data that'd be worth the effort. However, if we were to do that, we'd probably want it more like showing an "activity stream" for the user, and you could optionally "favorite" your activities and it'd get featured somewhere here.
- That "activity stream" thing (not so much the favorites) might be a good idea anyway to have as one or more blocks here, as a general indication of user engagement; while you can click to e.g. posts/commits to see that information, not everyone's going to see those links.
- Love the call-out to "Learn more about contributing." :)
- Somewhere we should link also to more info on badges, because the first thing I wanted to know was "How many of these are there and how do I get more?!"

Drupal activity block

- "My Drupal activity" seems like an odd title for this block when it only contains badges for supporting the DA, and the actual Drupal activity is elsewhere.
- +1 for "Interests and specialities" kind of being a dumping ground, and off to the right so you can see it if you want but it's not in your face.
- Why are "My events" lists of links for you, but logos for me? Is that just an artifact of the prototype?
- We should probably rename that list to "DrupalCons I've attended" because "My events" makes it sound like it's inclusive of local camps, other FLOSS conferences, etc. (which btw would be AWESOME but also seems like it would be quite an undertaking, esp. with logos).

I think I agree with everything webchick said in the previous comment.

A few other thoughts:

1. There are some things that have been lost in the current profile that I think need to be restored:

a) Given vs. family name. Not everyone orders their name given/family, and the new profile design does not show us which is which, as far as I can see.

b) Git attribution. This is a technical detail which contrib project maintainers occasionally need to find.

c) The links that are currently across the top of profile pages: Posts, Commits when I'm viewing someone else's profile; and in addition, Your Issues, Your Projects, Edit, Notifications, etc. when you're viewing your own profile. You need to put these into the mockup because otherwise we will not be able to see where they'll be.

2. In the Documentation Working Group, we are trying to make sure that documentation contributions get recognized. We definitely do not want to lose the "Over 1000 documentation edits" line in the profile... And I know that many people in the past have been trying to make sure that all types of contributions to the Drupal project are perceived as being valued (support, code, documentation, $$, design, etc.). (See many discussions of the "Prairie Initiative", a few years back.)

So, I think all "contributions" should be grouped together, under the heading of "Contributions to the Drupal project". This would include:
- The "Drupal contributions" field that we can currently edit in our profile (text area narrative)
- Documentation edits count line (as it currently is)
- Projects you've made commits to ("Projects" section on current profile)
- The checkbox self-reported contributions like "I help people in IRC". I like the idea of being able to prioritize them, and I like the icons idea.
- Membership in the Drupal Association (logo)
- How long you've had an account on the site
- This would also be an excellent place to have a link to the person's posts and commits (if these links are not going to be at the top of the page... in the Contributions section seems like a good idea -- could we have a count of the total commits and total posts listed, with these counts linking to these two pages?)

3. Have another section called "Occupation" maybe, which would include these items:
- Which company you currently work for & current job title (those need to be tied together closely)
- "Organization size" field
- "Roles in working with Drupal" field (I'm OK with renaming it "Specialties" as I think you've done here)
- "Other companies worked for" field
- "Industries worked in" field

4. And then group these "personal" items together, as you have in the current design mostly:
- Photo
- Languages spoken
- URL
- Social media (icons are good)
- IRC nickname
- Gender
- Country
- Contact button (good)
- Interests
- "My mentors" field
- "Bio" field (as a note, this is currently in the "personal information" tab when editing your profile, so it should be grouped with the personal stuff)

I am undecided about where all the DrupalCon icons should be, but I agree that if the list/logos are limited to listing DrupalCons, then the section should be headed "DrupalCons Attended" not "Events" generically.

a) Given vs. family name. Not everyone orders their name given/family, and the new profile design does not show us which is which, as far as I can see.

I would much prefer to go with the 80% hear. It feels so mechanical, a persons name looking like it's been spat out of a database.

Very nice work - thank you so much! I can't add much to the comments already given, but I specifically would +1 what webchick said, particularly the part about work/community separation.

The new design looks great. It is good feeling that our drupal profile pages going to look great. Regarding the content in every section of the block, most of the points are covered by @webchick and @jhodgdon. I would like give some feedback about the layout of the page and spacing between the blocks.

The website layout width is 960px, so the spacing between 3 columns is more and the content is freely flowing in each column, there is no clear separation between each block in the column. I just re-arranged in the blocks a bit and managed spaces and copied below.

I simply used paint to create this image. These are the changes I have done.

1. Moved Personal Interests, Industries worked in, Companies Worked for to left column. Currently left column is more about the Personal information.

2. The rest of blocks talk about user association with Drupal.

After those changes, the page looks even more neat and it perfectly fits into 960px width. Even if we make the responsive, the blocks will shift the rows. I did not include all the blocks like contact link, Know more about contributions buttons. These can be arranged in some row.

Consider adding support for Google Author (link to Google + profile) to improve the ranking of the profile page in search results. See https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/2539557?hl=en

Sample:
<a href="https://plus.google.com/109412257237874861202?rel=author">Google</a>

Any user can of course do this in their own profile as long as html is allowed, but to provide the correct field as a default would provide better structure.

On the current profile page adding the rel=author to your Google plus field will result in the link being displayed as "https://plus.google.com/YOUR-ID?rel=author" so a shortened version that only displays the domain name plus.google.com would be preferred.

Like that idea @seiplax it's a bit more complicated than #2161929: Add a profile field for GitHub account. but should go through the same process.

Can you open a new issue for that and then link back to here?

I think it would be great to see a list of articles that a user has posted on Planet Drupal. This poses some challenges, because up to this point, the Drupal.org username is not a part of the Planet Drupal feeds. But if it were added, and possibly there was a way to "claim" articles that have shown up on Planet Drupal in the past, it becomes a really great way to discover the thought leadership of a given Drupal.org user.

re #38
I don't think our current Planet set up would allow for such a feature (without heavy custom coding). This might change in the future but currently this doesn't seem to be achievable.

re Google Author

I am pretty sure we have such an issue already in some queue but I wasn't able to dig it up.

@dddave & @seiplax think this is the existing issue on Google+ #2083781: Decide what to do, if anything, about rel=author links in profile fields

One thing that might get missed because webchick's profile was the one used in the example is that she is one of the very few people who would have any commits show up for Drupal core, because it's the person who literally commits the patch, rather than those who work on the patch, that get their commits to show up on d.o.

My understanding is that this is a difficult problem to solve, but I think it's also one of the most important ones. I think it's more than fine if those who are literally committing the patches for core, modules and themes get credit on profile pages: a ton of work goes into reviewing patches and making sure they're fit to go in.

I think it is an important goal to find a way to provide credit on profile pages for those contributing to patches that get committed as well. Otherwise, unless you are maintaining a project on d.o., that section sits empty, even if you make a lot of contributions. It's not immediately obvious that that's what's going on (it wasn't to me for a long time).

Best of luck and thanks for all the work on enhancing the profile pages.

It's looking really nice--I agree with most of Angie's suggestions...

As for the badges--they do look a bit large, and may be better in a sidebar in chronological order.

And, if there is still help needed on the icons, I can pitch in.

P.S.--To add to mdrummond's comment--
My colleagues and I have been discussing this--if a contributors' Drupal user number is added to their git profile (or the specific clone being worked upon), will it be reflected on Drupal.org?

@mdrummond, that is a separate issue entirely.

#2042697: Add historical issue credits to Drupal.org user profile is that issue.

What this issue can provide is guidelines for keeping the profile page excellent as things come up and want to be added/changed. So it doesn't go back to being a pile of data.

Great!

I am not sure "Contributions to the Drupal Project" is the right header either -- but I think it's very important to put all contributions on an equal footing and in the same section, so we do not give the impression that one type of contribution is more/less valued than any other. I completely understand that many people equate "Drupal Core" with "Drupal Project"... Maybe it could be "Contributions to Drupal Projects" (note the S at the end) to indicate the many projects that make up our ecosystem? Or even "Contributions to the Drupal Ecosystem" or "Contributions to the Drupal Community"?

I personally do not have a strong opinion on "contributions" vs. "professional" coming first. As you say, people have different reasons for having drupal user accounts. What's important (to me) is to make them be in separate sections, with the appropriate information in appropriate sections. If people could order the sections, that would possibly be good; but on the other hand, having all profiles having the same layout is helpful for finding the information you need (you don't have to search around for it if everyone has the same layout). So I think that would be better.

Regarding "git attribution"... If you go to my user page, you'll see a few lines that look like this:

This information is important to have handy for contrib project maintainers, so they can properly give credit to people who make patches. This attribution is how the "Commits" section is made on profiles (for non-Core projects). [We don't use that kind of attribution in Drupal Core, which is why people do not have Drupal Core commit credits shown on their profiles, except for the 6-8 of us who actually make the commits to Core (see discussion above).]

"Contributions to the Drupal Community"++ That's a more inclusive word that implies the sorts of things that Dani and other "non-code contributors" do.

I personally do not have a strong opinion on "contributions" vs. "professional" coming first. As you say, people have different reasons for having drupal user accounts. What's important (to me) is to make them be in separate sections, with the appropriate information in appropriate sections.

Ditto. :) What I had a negative reaction to was the fact that my personal (for me, community) info + work info were smooshed together as though they were the same thing. Calling out "Work stuff" as a separate box and putting that related info there is fine. Something along the lines of pflame's mockup in #34 that shows "My oraganization(s)" (though probably not with that heading, to be inclusive of freelancers).

I agree the Git attribution stuff is important, but it is only important at the point in time at which you're incorporating someone's patch into a given project. In other words, it's complete noise on the user profile itself, and probably was only put there because no one could think of a better idea what to do with it. So I would prefer to move that to the issue queue instead, where it's more contextually relevant... maybe in some sort of pop-up on the username or something.

Brad Frost had a great article today on prototyping with dynamic data in order to see how things look with different lengths of names or if certain fields aren't filled out. Thought it might be handy for those working on this: http://bradfrostweb.com/blog/post/designing-with-dynamic-content/

All of the above is brilliant and will make people's Drupal profiles a much more interesting and informative thing to read.

I want to spend a little time thinking about how people's Drupal Profiles are actually a much wider thing than what is controlled (for want of a better word) by drupal.org:

• The first example to come to mind is certification and how some organisations are offering certs in Drupal. It certainly strikes me that, should I hold such a certificate, I would definitely want them to appear on my Drupal Profile. Now, while the number of organisations offering Drupal certs is low, we could handle that by talking with them directly and including code to display them. Maybe not if they take off with other orgs. Also, I might consider my certs in SQL, ITIL and agile PM to be very relevant - I would very much like them to be displayed.
• Attendance at DrupalCamps, especially where that includes an element of volunteering or speaking most definitely should be shown. Do the drupal.org staffers really want to spend time incorporating every single event somehow? What if the event is relevant but not quite Drupal? Say I went to SymfonyConf? How could I get that on my profile if the drupal.org staffers don't incorporate tools to do it?
• I could keep going on...

So, I think I'm trying to make the point that we need to decentralise at least some of the methods of displaying and awarding recognitions of these contributions/achievements. Yeah, I'm talking Open Badges (http://openbadges.org) and how we could extend some of the drupal.org profile using them.

If other organisations, like Acquia, were able to award an Open Badge as part of certification, it could be shared by the recipient and automatically incorporated in an appropriate location on the member's drupal.org profile. Drupal.org staffers don't have to do anything other than have code that displays all users' badges that are published publicly and tagged appropriately.

The same goes for all DrupalCamps and other, related, camps - all they have to do is award a badge for attendance (or a really special badge for speaking :-) ) and it is automatically incorporated into member's profile.

For drupal.org specific contributions, we can display the contribution in any way we like (including a nice SVG version of the badge, so long as well also have a PNG) but it would also be really quite nice to award an Open Badge, too. That way, members can display that badge in other places as well as drupal.org. Must be more valuable than yet another LinkedIn endorsement!

I've done this Open Badges incorporation before and I'm happy and prepared to do it again...

About certification badges: #2276569: Acquia Certification badge

This would need to be an open process: i.e. no gate-keeper function for webmasters of drupal.org so that we have to decide each and every time which cert we allow to be displayed. This comes with policy implications.

Exactly - dddave - it should simply be open to all to make badges and for members to choose which badges, if any, they want to display on their profile. This isn't an Acquia special thing - it's quite the opposite...

@rachel_norfolk great idea. Would be good to have more discussion about Open Badges and similar recognition tools in #2203401: Add Open Badge Infrastructure .

Whether we use Open Badge, our own list of DrupalCon "badges", or something else, I think we can proceed with the overall profile design discussion here, and swap that out later if something else is preferred. mgifford: thanks for pointing to an existing issue to discuss badge ideas in a central place!

My use of d.o profiles is the following:

• I want to find out the best method of contact for a community member.
• I want to copy git author info to easily give Git attribution.

When I'm on a d.o profile, I enjoy finding information unrelated to the tasks above such as learning about

• Drupal projects, documentation, localization, and other Community involvement so that I can discover awesome things I am not aware of
• Interests, etc... so that I can learn about my peers

Given that, I think that I might not use profiles more after the design as I would lose 50% of the reason I go to a user profile in the first place. However I really like the improvements. I might just learn to write out git attribution by hand hovering over the link to get the user id. I disagree that git attribution is noise - it's one of the reasons to actually go to an user profile. The rest is fluff, but it's good fluff

Given that the lack of proper attribution is causing bad blood and discourages contributing I would like to see that we make it easy to find this info on the new profiles.

edit: webchick's idea about providing this in the issue queue would be the grand prize imho. Major win.

Regarding git attributions, I don't think that it should be moved off the main profile page. It's critical information.

FWIW, Dreditor uses the /user/*/git-attribution callback (which is JSON) to construct it's commit messages. A working example of mine: https://www.drupal.org/user/501638/git-attribution

Perhaps we can turn that into a full fledged tab instead if people really want it off the main profile page? We could instead move that JSON so it's included with #1710850: Deploy RestWS for D7 project issue JSON. Once that's implemented, we shouldn't need this specific path any longer and could repurpose it?

Just a note: You cannot count on people using Dreditor. We need to make sure that maintainers can get this information without having installed the Dreditor browser plugin. Not everyone uses it.

A separate user profile tab for Git attribution information will move it further even away from issues. I'd recommend discussing improving the existing instructions, and maybe adding something for project maintainers on the issue page at #2288727: [meta] Provide credit to organizations / customers who contribute to Drupal issues and/or separate issues. The Git attribution info on user profiles should not be removed until it is in a better place; we probably shouldn't spend time tinkering with it in the existing place, since #2288727: [meta] Provide credit to organizations / customers who contribute to Drupal issues will need more UI real-estate.

@jhodgdon, I know you don't use Dreditor. Please read the first paragraph again.

edit: No one is "counting on Dreditor" to be installed. In fact, we're trying to move many of it's (sensible) "features" into d.o.

I was merely pointing out a hidden URL that many people are not aware of and the potential to possibly repurpose it as a visible tab. In hindsight, perhaps @drumm is correct in that obscuring it even further is not a good idea since it is (and should be) used very often.

#2288727: [meta] Provide credit to organizations / customers who contribute to Drupal issues is essentially what would affect this change (which also, btw, moves this "feature" from Dreditor to d.o..... which affects all users, not just those who have it installed). Until this happens though, it really shouldn't be removed from user profiles.

What I suggested was to move the Git information even more front-and-center to the people who actually need that information, which is namely project maintainers looking at patches in the issue queue. The fact that it's on the user profile at all was simply a lazy design decision, not because it actually belongs there. It's completely irrelevant for approximately 99.98% of our user base (because they are not developers uploading patches to other peoples' issue queues queues) and 99.999999999999999% of the time (because it's only relevant in the exact precise moment that you as a project maintainer are committing a patch that was authored by someone else). So put the info in the issue queue HTML somewhere. Then Dreditor doesn't need special tricks cos it would just be right there in the DOM, and people who don't know about either Dreditor nor about the fact that buried in a sea of links there's a git attribution flag could use it easily. If anything, this would result in more credit being given, not less.

Agreed though that until there's a workable design for how to put this info in the issue queue, we shouldn't be removed wholesale. But I don't think it's the same as #2288727: [meta] Provide credit to organizations / customers who contribute to Drupal issues, which is specific to organizations, involves weird commit strings, etc. The issue we need is just simply be about moving existing information to where it's more contextually relevant. Opened #2295411: Auto-generate Git attribution info / commit messages on Drupal.org to discuss it more.

I like having events listed, even if they are given less prominence, and even if they are on another screen (or partially hidden). It helps me see how involved a person is in their local community, and what their general radius of travel is. I also think it can help publicize camps, if they are listed. Many of them I don't know exist until I meet someone that went. It could also help give credit to session speakers, and organizers, which I don't think we do enough of after events are over.

I like #63!

Expanding on #64, what if we made a "Drupal Events" field, which would be a free entry text field that automatically turns into links (not sure what you call those fields, but I mean it would work the same as what you can now do in "Industries worked in" and "Companies worked for" and other fields like that that are currently on the profile)? There could be a help/description text below the field saying to put the year in, with examples like "DrupalCon Amsterdam 2014" and "Pacific Northwest Drupal Summit 2013", and hopefully it would auto-complete as you type.

It seems like this would then not take up a huge amount of space, and it would go well in the Community Involvement section.

Regarding Projects... There are lots of people who contribute patches to projects, but who don't maintain any of them (and if the Git Attribution thing is working, the projects they've contributed patches to do currently show up in their profiles). So... For me, "Projects Maintained" is good, but for others, probably not so good.

Could we possibly have both? Maybe Projects Maintained could look like what is in #63 (with the ability to choose 3 or so to highlight, as you've illustrated), and then there could be a "Projects Contributed To" section, that could be more compact -- it could actually be formatted like Mentors, Companies Worked For, and those other sections that are just a paragraph of links? That shouldn't be too hard to accomplish.

ps: Dani - should we close comments on the groups.drupal.org page so people stop posting suggestions there? I can take care of that if you think it is a good idea (you can try editing your post and see if you can turn off commenting too, but I'm a content admin on groups.drupal.org so I would have permission even if you don't).

A freeform field for events is what I was also assuming. Adding a link is debatable, only because camp sites tend to not live very long, so we'd end up with a lot of dead links. (Unless they can be pointed at an archive.) On the other hand, not having a link to the session page means wanting to put the session info on the profile page. I don't think there is room for that. Would it be objectionable for someone to instead use a link to their own website post about the session?

For text, I'd like to see "Presented at Pacific Northwest Drupal Summit 2013" versus "Pacific Northwest Drupal Summit 2013" which just implies attendance.

Free-form gets messy though: "Pacific Northwest Drupal Summit" vs. "PNW Drupal Summit" vs. "PNWDS" vs... Then again, if the intent is individual contribution vs. trying to aggregate a list of people from event X (which is what the current profile checkboxes let you do), then that makes sense (and arguably, those listing pages are useless since you could just go to the event website and click the "Attendees" link for a more accurate count.)

Can we maybe split the "track general community event speaking/attendance" talk to a separate issue? Currently the only thing we track on profiles is a checkbox to say "I attended DrupalCon Foo" so if we want to do more than that, we'd need to do some work, figure out what exactly we're after, etc.

Haven't reviewed the latest mocks at all, just didn't want us to embed 30+ comments about some sub-topic inside the main "meta" topic that's supposed to be about reviewing the overall design. :)

@webchick, the events were removed from the mockup so it's worth discussing the inclusion/exclusion here. I agree the implementation details can be discussed elsewhere.

As you pointed out, my perspective is not to use them to aggregate attendance, and keep their relevance limited to the individual profiles.

Overall, I like the revisions a lot! Everything feels much more organized/clear. Some more feedback:

• Dang. Yeah, it unfortunately looks pretty squished/busy now that we've lost that extra whitespace due to width constraints :( Wonder if we need to move down to two columns instead: About *My* Life / About My *Drupal* Life? Note: I'm very much not a designer so you should probably ignore all of this. :D
• +1 for more numeric stats (though could we consolidate into badges and make the badges bigger again, I wonder?), +1 for "Community Involvement."
• The "My projects" proposal is tricky. I think different people want different things. For me, I'd want "My projects" to actually mean "My projects" (meaning Drupal, Spark, Pants, not also stuff like the stupid Poll sandbox or projects I used to maintain 6+ years ago like Quiz). However, that's mainly because a) I don't do much contrib patching work anymore, and b) I don't need a job ;) (also c) I don't want support requests, and my experience is you get them if you're identified as knowing something about X module). For others, though, they most likely do want their profile to feature all of their code contributions for these reasons. (If you contribute patches heavily to a "big name" module like Drupal Commerce or Features, for example, that looks great on a résumé.) Splitting them into "My projects" and "Projects I've contributed to" as jhodgdon suggests in #65 is probably the most feasible way forward. That would also make the bio field of many code contributors much shorter, e.g. https://www.drupal.org/u/dave-reid or https://www.drupal.org/u/sun who currently maintain these lists by hand.
• I agree with #64 that I feel like events are important, so would rather not lose them. Not sure where the heck they'd go though. Maybe squish down to a single "Has attended Drupal events" badge with a "more info" next to it to list specific ones?
• It feels weird to me for the "bio" info to be so far below the fold. I can see why you did that, since the bio can be potentially super long, like mine. But on most other user profiles I have around the internet, it's pretty front-and-center, or at least the short version of it: see https://twitter.com/webchick, http://www.slideshare.net/webchickenator, https://www.acquia.com/about-us/team/angela-byron, etc.
• I still maintain that "Git attribution" doesn't belong here. It belongs in-context, along the lines of what's mocked here: #2295411: Auto-generate Git attribution info / commit messages on Drupal.org However, people know my stance on this by now so I'll STFU about it. ;)
• Once again, "Forum posts" as a tab along the top doesn't really work for me. What about the documentation pages I've written? What about the issue discussions I've contributed to? (Issue discussions are where I spend 99.999% of my Drupal.org time, as a developer.) Currently https://www.drupal.org/user/24967/track has all of that information in one place ("Your posts"). Not only is this functionality built into core so we get it for free, but I personally use this all of the time when evaluating Drupal.org activity of e.g. a potential employee. Handling support requests in the forum is just one of the many ways that people can contribute to Drupal, and I don't understand why it deserves that level of prominence, especially to the exclusion of all the other things (and also given that http://drupal.stackexchange.com has largely eclipsed the d.o forums as a support resource at this point, though that's obviously a bit more contentious of an assertion).
• Also along the top edge for your "own" profile, it seems like "My issues" could be consolidated and "Issues for my projects" could be a sub-tab of that, so you'd save a bit of horizontal space.

I agree with the cluttered comments. Personally, I would rather scroll than cram everything into four columns. For example, webchick's page doesn't have the bio text. If that is added, it would have to squeeze into the second column. I'm not a UI expert, but do people object to multiple tabs? The bio on the main page, contributions on another? It would give more breathing room if we're trying to cram stuff in. Plus, we need to plan for expansion. Just a thought.

Is the "About First Last" subhead necessary, since the page title already has "First Last (user)" and they are in close proximity to each other? They also appear to be the same font size.

I agree with webchick about the Git attributions, but it shouldn't be completely gone from the user profile (maybe on another tab) in case you need to get to it. The question I have is do people need to quickly access the Git attribution outside of the issue queue? If it can be retrieved from the issue, is that enough, or do people regularly need it when not working in an issue?

As the "Move simplified Profile2 module into core" issue (https://www.drupal.org/node/1668292) is now gathering momentum, it's important to bear in mind how this proposal's going to be realised in the light of the successor to the core Profile module.

On the other hand, is this effort geared towards a different solution to user profile pages?

dajala - that is off topic for this discussion... This issue is just about revising the *look* of the profile -- how it is displayed, not addressing the underlying question of how it is generated (which for now is Drupal 7 Core).

@jhodgdon: I'm afraid I don't see the irrelevance of my comment. This issue relates to a functionality provided by the old Profile module that no longer exists in core at the moment. The ongoing work I referred to, is to provide an improved Profile module based on the deprecated core Profile module - which will hopefully implement what is being discussed here.

Anyway, as you've rightly pointed out, this is about the display and not where the data is coming from.

I still maintain that "Git attribution" doesn't belong here. It belongs in-context, along the lines of what's mocked here: #2295411: Move git attribution info from user profile to a more contextually relevant place However, people know my stance on this by now so I'll STFU about it. ;)

Awesome. I think that improves the UX for both users viewing user profiles and users who work in contrib issue queues. Hopefully those of us that only go to user profiles for that reason continue to go to user profiles. ;-)

First off: lovely work!

Regarding the git attribution item, that should be visible for all users, so that the user doesn't have go to back and modify their profile should hey decide to commit a patch. It might also help to have a small "copy to clipboard" icon beside it, just to make it super quick & easy.

1. Overall grouping of information items seems good now.
2. I might have missed it but haven't read a rationale for the three column layout. The overall appearance of the page is still very crowded, chaotic even. Might help a bit to post versions without the annotation markers.
3. To what extent is this also the proposed visual design?
4. We' ll still want to have small screen mockups as well, we're definately not working mobile first here :-) It will force us to prioritize the sections in a way that I feel the three col layout somewhat evades doing.
5. Semi off-topic: not sure about current status of accounts/profiles for organisationsand how this design would work for that. This could be a followup issue.
6. Something to think about: putting the 'My Drupal community contribution' section front and center seems right, but how will this work for new accounts? The whole middle section would be empty for them.

Thanks again for pushing this forward.

1. tabs when looking at one's own profile
1a. I also think it makes sense to replace (when looking at one's own profile) the Forum posts link with ... Discussions (or Activity) (which are all posts, including forum and elsewhere).
1b. I'm not sure that we need My Commits, Issues I'm following, or Issues for My Projects there either. I think those things can be gotten to from links inside the profile.
1c. For example My Commits tab duplicates the "100223" commits link under community involvement. (which I think goes to, for example, https://www.drupal.org/user/258568/track/code)
1d. "Issues for My Projects" tab (on current/old profile: "Your projects") https://www.drupal.org/project/user is a link I dont think I've ever used before. It's pretty neat. I think though we get rid of that tab, and have a the header for "Projects Maintained" link there, or it's "+ XX more.." link. Or add a "Issues in Projects Maintained" link in that section. Are sandboxes also listed there? If so, it is not just "Issues for My Projects", but also the place to go to see a list of all my projects (including sandboxes). I have often wanted to find a sandbox that I know belongs to a person, so the "+ XX more.." under their projects would be nice if it gave me that. Might mean we need a user argument to that view.. oh! we have it: https://www.drupal.org/project/user/24967 ... and it does list sandboxes. There is no way to get to that from just looking at someone elses profile (using our current profiles, or in the mock up). The missing information that lacks, is the number of commits to each project that is in the current project list, for example: Poll (from core) (2557 commits). We could add a column to the table of projects that includes the number of commits. Then we can reuse that page we already have for the "+ XX more.." in the Projects Maintained section. And if we get rid of the "Issues for My Projects"/(Your projects) then we dont have to decide what to name the tab. *And* for someone who does not maintain any projects (see Dani's sample profile) that section does not show in their profile (which is nice) .. and it is a bit weird they have a My projects tab when they dont have any projects. There is a link to create a new project from the project/user/X page (See sample https://www.drupal.org/project/user/428679 [happens to be no projects for that user, but the create link is there] ... but that is not the only place to do it from. There is also this which shows in google results for create sandbox project: https://www.drupal.org/create-sandbox If we think most people discover how to create a sandbox by going to the Your Projects tab on their profile... then maybe we dont want to delete that tab. Otherwise I think we can loose it and repurpose the "+ XX more.." under Projects Maintained. (Sorry this went deep into what are on those sub pages, but could not really think about if they should be there, or what they should be renamed to without understanding where they link to.)
1e. "Issues I'm following" (old Your Issues) tab.
1ei. https://www.drupal.org/project/issues/user also can take a user id argument like https://www.drupal.org/project/issues/user/24967 but I think it would be better to just change that to be a link to the advanced search which exposes the follower field and fill it in like https://www.drupal.org/project/issues/search?projects=&project_issue_fol... Re-using that advanced search page exposes to people that they can change the argument to be any user in a way that is not clear from just seeing the url https://www.drupal.org/project/issues/user and guessing that we might be able to put a user id number after (which fewer people are going to be aware of since we have /u/username now .. and the way I find people's id now is by clicking on their contact link and getting from the url there.)
1eii. I also think this would be good to expose on the profile of people who are not you. Maybe that is incorporated under the Discussions tab (for people not the owner of the profile tabs are mocked as being: Profile, Discussions, Commits)
1eiii. Maybe "issues followed by" can move to under the "+ XX more.." link in the "Projects Contributed to" section. As long as that section shows for everyone who is following some issues, even if they dont have commit attribution for any projects. Let's not move this until we can do that. If it moves there, it could be like: "Following XX issues", with a count.

1f. Unifying the tabs for both profiles viewed by the owner and viewing other profiles.
I think we can have Dashboard for viewing own profile.
Then the rest can be the same, just: Profile, Discussions, Issues following,
if Discussions goes to a tracker/Activity page.
As mentioned, it would be cool if that page could group, or have sub tabs, or configurable filter to separate: forum posts, and issue queue comments (NOT the same as issues following).
Right now, I think that is closest to the "Posts" link on the old profile that goes to https://www.drupal.org/user/24967/track

#2101879: Be consistent with tab order and paths as well as page titles in user profiles. Can probably be our issue for this.

Eventually I think we can get rid of the Issues following tab also (adding to the Discussions page a way to list/filter those and/or putting a link to that under the section "Projects Contributed to".

1g. the mock ups are missing the line under the tabs that goes up over the active profile tab name/link. (It is in the mock up for when viewing someone else's

2. mentors
2a. icons only?
For the mentors section, can we include the d.o user name under the icons? I dont want to have to click on each to see who they are.
I guess this might make it one person per row there, but seems like there is room in that column.
I would rather have just d.o names than just images.
(I, and many of us, recognize people by their icons, but for most people, the username will mean more to them.)
2b. How many?
Why have "+ XX more.." for the mentors? I think we can just list them all, or put a larger cuttoff on it, like 30.
2c. This change might effect the people who are scrapping the mentor graph data.

3. First Last (username) in sidebar
We might want to see how someone with a long name and long username looks... I think we have some with 26 chars?
Anything else to look at with long data? Maybe an area of expertise that is long.

4. Areas of Expertise
4a. Is the "Areas of Expertise" field free form, one thing per line, like the current: "Roles in working with Drupal"?
4b. Will each button line phrase be a link?
They are not now on the old profile page. But they look like button links on the mock up. .. maybe they dont look like buttons or links... in the mock up, they change color on hover though.

5. Where is a list of what the numbered squares (annotation markers) on the mock ups correspond to? Oh, I think I can see them by going to the live version: http://gfx6wx.axshare.com/#p=profile__non-code_contributor No, that doesn't help. And the notes there seem to be (sometimes) unrelated to their location on the mock up.

6."Learn more about contributing"
6a. The location of the "Learn more about contributing" implies it is related to the money related badges. (Implies people who click on it will learn more about being a Supporting Partner) I suggest putting the "Learn more about contributing" under the tupple of Community Involvement stats/Projects maintained/Projects Contributed to ... or under that whole section (after Drupal Events).
6b. Where does that link for "Learn more about contributing" go to?
I suggest the "Learn more about contributing" link go to https://www.drupal.org/getting-involved

7. badges (DA membership badges)
7a. Currently, in the old profile, under the DA badges is "YesCT helps support and grow the Drupal community with the Drupal Association." with DA being a link to .. the
I suggest keeping some phrase and some link under the badges, or a header on that section.
7b. does each badge link to more about that badge? ... No, right now, they all link to the same DA membership page. https://assoc.drupal.org/membership Maybe they could link to https://assoc.drupal.org/membership#supporting-partner (those named sections do not yet exist)
7c. This would help with webchicks request from #30 regarding people seeing badges on other profiles and wanting to know how to get badges for themselves.
7d. Info on DA membership expiration
7di. Missing from the mock ups when viewing one's own profile is also
"You Rock! Thank you for purchasing a Drupal Association membership. Your support has helped us to support the Drupal community.
Your membership will expire on Mar 06, 2015."
7dii. When it expires.. does a link show there? "Your Drupal Association membership expired on Mar 06, 2014." ?
7diii. For everyone not a member should it say "Join the Drupal Association." ? With a link to why?
7div. Or are we on purpose removing all the stuff link that? Did anyone tell the DA?

8. Can we make the IRC *label* for the irc nick go to the irc page: https://www.drupal.org/irc

9. style of Contact and "Learn more about Contributing"
I suggest we use the green button styling instead of these blue ones with the square corners. ... class="link-button"
This will make them more uniform with how main actions are on other d.o pages, the contact link more obvious, and make not everything blue.

10. there are some admin things we dont need to style, but when manually testing this whole thing, we should just remember to check that they are still showing.
(sub tab "Administer comments", "Administer nodes", .. more? And "Status: blockRole: revoke role Not a spammer" (or grant role Not a spammer)

11. The green sub tabs when viewing someone else's profile: in Mock up: Drupal, Work, Contact
11a. Contact here means contact information? some of the stuff on the left sidebar? I confused this with the Contact link we have now on the old profile page. (Styling the Contact button green will help (see my point 9). But if we keep this as a tab.. that goes to a page which just duplicates the info here, but limits it to just contact info like things, I suggest calling it Contact information.
11b. I think we can just skip these green sub tabs. All the info is on the profile anyway.
11c. If we look at this page as one long full width page (like as a mobile mock up might) without columns.. then maybe these can be table of content like links that jump to sections (and not separate pages).

[edit added point 12]
12. The "Member for" 9 years 1 month information is gone in the mock ups. Is that on purpose?
I suggest we add that back in and change it to: "Account created" 9 years 1 month ago.
Order it as its own section, but low, under Drupal Events.
Or maybe better, have it be an automatic item in the section "Moments in Drupal History"
Maybe... "Account 24967 created 9 years 1 month ago." Cause then I can get people's uid. I miss it being in the url. (Feel free to just tell me no. that I will have to keep extracting it from the url of the contact link or some other link that has uid as an argument in the url.) I suspect if this page becomes a json object (or something) in the future, that the uid of the user will be a useful bit of info, and then people's (scraping) tools wont break if they are trying to extract the uid.

---
I think we are ready to start breaking more things out to other new sub issues or to issues that already exist, and update the issue summary. (so that it is clear where to discuss the finer points.)
I'll start on that right away.

changes to motivation. making the description of the current/old profiles more accurate.

clarified some things in proposed resolution,
including changing links to issues from http://d.o/node/12345 to [#12345] so they are nice issue links.
added some child issues.
--
have to stop for now. Might be able to come back to more issue making and summary updating later today, but if someone else wants to do it first, please! :)

I'm not sure whether you prefer comments here or on the Prototype, but I'm adding some there... Overall, looks pretty good!

I've updated the issue title to reflect that we are not just changing the layout, but adding/surfacing new content. I wonder if it's easier to split implementation between adding the new layout and then each new content block? I can imagine this design getting snagged on the details of some of these new content blocks.

In the future, I think having a UI like the d.o dashboard, where a user can expose and prioritise content that they think is important to them, would be so nice, vs trying to place users into two groups. I think that would require something like panelizer though...

Ooo, +1 to what Lewis said. Having the sections be movable/optional, like the dashboard. I also agree that would be feature creep for this revision, but we should think about that for later.

Should the comments that are here be also added to the Demo site, so that everything is in one place?

I'm not sure about the mentor pictures. Most people are not going to recognize someone by picture, but they would recognize the user name. If a lot of the mentors don't have a picture, you'll get a lot of the stock silhouette. Also, if mentors change their pictures, that reduces recognizability. I could see picture + user name, but I don't know how that will look.

@davidhernandez

I like your idea of having picture + username. I think will look good if the user scroll over the picture it will bring a small overlay with the username. Something similar to this picture. On the first row, left column you will see that the mentor have overlay with the username.

Username can be very, very long (see: #2228887: Always display full usernames of node and comments authors on issue pages, I have seen even longer ones than this).

If I understand #95 correctly, this is suggesting that the overlay is restrained to bounding box of the image. I'm not entirely sure that would work very well. The image is of constrained proportions, trying to fit varying content inside it will ultimately be futile.

I'm all for adding usernames FWIW :) I do, however, think it would be wise to do these simply as a tooltip. This can be either a native OS/browser title attribute on the <img> tag or using the existing JS tooltip library that's used on dashboards (hover over a close icon).

@Mark Garver Great observation a tooltip will look a lot better for long usernames.

@Mark Garver Great observation a tooltip will look a lot better for long usernames.

@YesCT in #81, point 12, the "Member since..." text is still there. It is directly under the subhead "Community Involvement".

ah yes. thanks.

I finally found some decent time to sit and look through these mockups. Great job so far! Thanks a lot for leading this effort, Dani. Some thoughts below:

1. Display of name/username.

Considering that 100% of users will have usernames and definitely less will have real names available, username should be proper independent citizen on the page. Not being in brackets after the real name.
So I'd say, move it to the new line, above or below the real name, maybe above picture. We need to ensure page looks good when real name is absent.

2. Gender /country / languages

I'd recommend moving these above social media links. These fields are about *who* the person is. Social media + IRC make sense next to Contact button as they all are about how to contact the person.

3. Current roles

Are we merging company / job title with community roles here (Such as UX lead in Comm tools team)? I am not sure this is a good idea. All community involvement info is located in the 2nd column. Implementation-wise it'll be confusing as well. Job / company fields are tied to organization pages. We also sync them to different sub-sites and use to display all the badges info etc.

4. Community involvement

While I like it being front and center I too have little concern with most of the space given to community involvement and less to who the person is. For less involved people or totally new people, the only thing they can say on the profile is who the are. The rest of the page will be empty.

5. My mentors

I feel that showing My mentors as pictures brings too much visual attention to this section. I came to find out about the person, but my eyes are mostly drawn to a bunch of other people, who might or might not have user pictures available.

I would suggest showing mentors as usernames and moving them to the 2nd column, somewhere next to Moments in Drupal History, which would make more sense than on the side. Did we also consider to show "People I mentored"?

6. 3rd column

While it's impossible to get 100% balanced page because different people will have different amounts of info available, I feel like the 3rd column is always too short now.

I would suggest moving the Association badges on top of it and moving all the "I contribute..", "I organize..." stuff below. And changing the button to say "Learn how to get involved", which would make perfect sense below all kinds of involvement a person has.

To me, "Display Name" implies this is what people will see when you post, which isn't correct. It is always the username. So it might be more appropriate to keep it as "Full Name" or use some other wording. I'm also wondering if there is such a low completion rate of first/last name, because full name is there. "Why fill out both?", people might think. Anyone know which one was there first, or were they always there together?

Anyone know which one was there first, or were they always there together?

afaik Full name was there much longer. First and Last name was added later when we needed this data separated for either DrupalCon sites or memberships. This and confusion of having both might be the reason. When we roll out the new layout, we can totally publish a post and tell people that 'Full name' field is gone and they need to update their profiles if they want real names present there. There is really no reason to have both Full name and First/Last (Bonus point, more people updating profiles - more people with fancy profile urls).

Profile page should work for people who have no First/Last name provided, so at a minimum username should not be in brackets.

Certain languages/cultures order given/family names differently. In English, a person usually writes their given name(s) first, followed by their family name (e.g.: "Dries Buytaert"). However, in many East Asian languages (e.g.: Mandarin Chinese, Korean, etc.), a person usually writes their family name first, followed by their given name, without a comma between the names (i.e.: "Buytaert Dries").

I guess it comes down to whether the DrupalCon sites / memberships need to distinguish between given/family name or name that comes first / name that comes last:

• If they need to distinguish between given/family name, and we order them in the English style, then the order that the names are displayed in might feel a little strange to people used to the other order
• if they only need to distinguish between name that comes first / name that comes last, then people can write their family name first if that makes them feel more comfortable.

This concern may be mitigated somewhat if the proposed Terms of Service continue to state that all communication must be in English: people who read it may be more likely to expect to see their names in the English style.

Just because communication is in English doesn't mean that people want their name displayed backwards...

As part of #2322261: Migrate Work-related profile fields, I'm getting the rendering of those fields closer to the design here. At the moment, you can see progress on pages like https://drumm-drupal.redesign.devdrupal.org/u/webchick.

Once enough of the fields going into the first column are migrated, then columns can be swapped, finishing that portion. All the fields to be migrated are listed at #2322245: [meta] Migrate profile fields to core fields.

A design implementation challenge I see coming up is the blue box around the user picture. What does the left edge do when the browser is wide? Currently, white would be added on the left, but it looks like it might be designed to have blue extend left. And Drupal.org currently doesn't use rounded containers anywhere. Is this a new design pattern we want to introduce?

What is the final design we are working from?

What does the left edge do when the browser is wide?

I think for now we are sticking to 960 grid as everywhere else. So blue box won't go out of that grid, there will be whitespace on the left.

Is this a new design pattern we want to introduce?

I don't think that's final visual design. So I'd do only rearrangement of data into columns for now.

What is the final design we are working from?

Dani and I had a call last week and discussed a few last changes to the layout. Nothing too big, just moving a few things around. She should upload final layout mockups soon. Then we'll need to do a bit of visual design changes. E.g. I would think buttons will use the green button style. Background for "tags" design is usually grey.

This looks like fantastic work Dani. I just wanted to give that feedback.

Not that constructive but I am with rootwork on this: pretty darn awesome.

Thanks for the mockups. I have a few last pieces of feedback, but overall I think we're almost there.

1. Gender is now buried very far down. I think this is pretty important and should should be brought back to where it was, next to location.
2. Languages spoken are fine down there, but I think it would be good to change the display to be the same as 'Personal interests'. Where each language is a link, upon click you can see others who speak the same language. While not as valuable for English, might be pretty interesting for other languages.
3. For "Companies worked for" field we now collect Job title for every company. I think we should display them in the same way as 'Current roles' field - a list of Job title, Company, one under another. This way we'll show much more - order in which person moved from company to company, and what they were doing in each of them.
4. For the 3rd column - I would move Association badges on top. This would: a. Make 'Community Involvement Stats' closer to 'Drupal Community Involvement' horizontally. b. Spread too much visual heaviness, created by badges being next to mentors pictures.

1a. Is it configurable to show + XX more for things?
webchicks events are all listed, but dani has a "more" at the end of a shorter list.

1b. In general, I think we should just list all. or have a bigger limit before going to + XX more.

2. I still think the usernames of the mentors is more important than what mentors look like.
Can we see what it would look like with one mentor per row in that block with the usernames?

3a. looks like a bunch of issues need to be made still for the remaining tasks.

3b.Made two and linked another.
#2332835: Link "IRC Nick" field to https://www.drupal.org/irc
#2332823: Make a view (or a listing) of Projects a user has contributed to
#2042697: Add historical issue credits to Drupal.org user profile

3c. but still more to be done.

4. I dont feel strongly about where gender is. Seems to fit into Personal info well with other interests and languages spoken.

5. current company... is that also to be listed under companies worked for? webchick's lists acquia in the companies worked for list, but dani's does not show 'the zen kitchen'. Is that because the user themselves would have to list the current company/companies manually in their previous companies field?

6. Oh dear. I just thought we have not seen what the profile edit pages will look like.

7. @danigrrl in #111 you mentioned including "views for 320 and 768 to see how the content might shift." but I dont see those. Can they be uploaded and added to the issue summary? oh wait, the summary does say to use the live previews and re-size there. ok.

For titles of some of the sections,

instead of "Projects Maintained" in the current mock up, I think it should be "Projects a Maintainer of". Thought about "Projects Maintaining" but that might be overstating...

instead of "Documentation Maintained" in the current mock up, I think it should be "Documentation Contributed to".

...I think the documentation work group team wants to add a feature where a person could be a maintainer of a docs page, so we could list the number of pages a maintainer of and also the number of documentation edits (and may be the number of documentation pages created, if that is not counted in the number of edits). Hm. the mock ups list projects and then the doc edits per project. Also can't do that yet. I tried to look up issues for them (cause I remember seeing them in the list of priorities the software working group was looking at from the docs team, but I didn't see issues for the maintainer one... So I made it, and added as related: #2332855: Maintainership for Documentation pages and sections. And found #1543262: Improve the integration between a project and its related documentation and #733908: Add noderef field for project to doc pages

Dries mentioned this in his keynote in Amsterdam - http://youtu.be/4NN5EM4CYVE?t=51m1s

EDIT: Also, what's with comments 119-124? They are annoying.

@mgifford: that's drumm linking back to individual issues/commits, showing the real progress towards the larger goal outlined in this issue. Don't be annoyed, rejoice! :-)

Ok.. Now I think I see.. Now I see what to focus ON it is way more encouraging. It's really not clear that it's anything but a glitch though..

Thanks for the clarification @yoroy!

#2060691: Migrate 'People mentored by' profile field to entity reference could use a bit of design for where to show a user's mentees.

Is there a follow-up issue for a user's git commit author string? I really am missing it being on the profile page as I'm not sure where to find it now.

Edit: non-convenient way I have to do this now, which is similar to when we didn't have this text:

1. Go to user's page. Copy and paste user name into text file.
2. Type ' <' , paste the user name again, and type '@' in text file.
3. Right-click on user's posts/commits, copy user id from url, paste into text file
4. Type '.no-reply.drupal.org>'.
5. Copy string
6. git commit --author="
"

mradcliffe - there is now a (quite brilliant, I have to say) little section on each and every issue for creating the appropriate git commit message.

If you look at the comment section below, you'll see "Credit & committting" - expand it and note you can get all the information there without even needing to visit the users' profiles.

I agree that with the new addition of #2295411: Auto-generate Git attribution info / commit messages on Drupal.org on each issue is indeed very handy and convenient for day to day activity (and for those who live in the issue queue). However, I still think completely removing this information from a user's profile is the wrong approach and also agree with @mradcliffe here.

While it may not be the "primary" reason for viewing a user's profile, it should still be included somewhere on the page (even if initially hidden/collapsed). There has definitely been times where I wanted to credit someone for a particular idea/commit, but there wasn't an "official" issue. This can happen frequently when collaborating in real time at a con/camp when involving contrib/sandboxed projects. We should still allow people to go to other user profiles and c&p this information as needed.

I thought that every commit was supposed to be related to an issue. Do you not follow that practice on your projects?

True, however I should have also stated that not every project starts as a full (or even a sandbox) project with d.o issue queues. Sometimes it's just hacking code to get a PoC working and sometimes they're started elsewhere (GH) or even just locally. These commits are then merged into d.o at a later date. Funny things happen when you collaborate in real-time or experimental ideas sometimes (especially in-house projects). Point is, while it is rare... there are times when this information would be useful to have in a contextual way (i.e. I want to contribute this user so I go to this user's profile to get the correct attribution information).

wow! thanks.

I think this pushes up #951114: Support all screen sizes in priority.

All elements on the user profile page, except the picture, are now fields or pseudo-fields, and can be positioned within the groups to re-order and re-arrange the page.

drumm++ That is quite a milestone!

I'm really missing the git attribution string on the user profile. This has been removed in #2295411: Auto-generate Git attribution info / commit messages on Drupal.org because the reasoning was that all code that is committed will have an issue associated with it and patches will be posted to that issue.

In reality code might arrive in many different ways that do not involve the issue queue. For example a common workflow for porting modules to Drupal 8 is to have a fork on Github that is used for the initial fast iterations that are typical in the early stages of the porting process. It's a waste of time to create issues for all these dozens of little steps.

But there are other scenarios as well. For example people might use different credentials in their own forks so these need to be rewritten before being pushed to drupal.org. It also happens that a whole range of commits get squashed during rebasing and then the git credits are lost and need to be reapplied. These maintenance tasks do not involve the issue queue, but are expected from a module maintainer that is acting as the sole gatekeeper of the code base. Applying the correct git credentials is important, people get upset if their hard work is not attributed.

If I want to credit someone I now find myself going through the process of:

1. Go to the user profile page of the person I want to credit
2. Click on the "Posts" tab
3. Click on a random issue in the list
4. Find that the person is missing from the "Credit & committing" list since the issue was only followed, not replied to
5. Repeat steps 1-4
6. Create a mock commit message
7. Extract the git credentials from the commit message

It's really not very convenient compared to having this right there on the profile page like it was before. Is it possible to reconsider this? Looking at Angie's mockup a natural place for it would be under "Projects contributed to".

I had already created an issue for this before I found my way here: #2405787: Restore git attribution string on user profile.

Yes, this is part of what I was attempting to convey in #135 and #137.

Just adding my voice to the discussion. Reading through the comments it was especially Angie who was very much in favor of removing the git attribution. As a core maintainer she is used to every commit originating from the issue queue, but things are a bit different in contrib land.

I've also worked for a project where the drupal.org issue queue is not used at all, they were using Jira for project management reasons.

I really love whole concept and want to add feature request - I would like to see there contribution summary (like on github). We can show there all issues/comments/patches/commits(/mentions) sent by user on minimalist calendar. That should be quite easy to accomplish and motivate people to be more involved on drupal.org.

added child #2434561: Put UID, account number, on d.o profiles

#2446889: Display 'new' indicator next to user picture of new users went in. I thought we had an old issue about identifying new users... still searching for it.

Adding one more task: #2494609: Make user profile URL aliases case sensitive username (nickname)
This will help on SEO, and also better reflects the usernames and IRC nicknames.

Updating for Working Groups prioritization work.

I'm not sure how to prioritize something like this. What does "robust" mean in this context?

Do you mean "Implement an actual design for user profiles so they're not just a random collection of fields slapped any old place?" :)

listening to drupal easy podcast 163 on contributing http://drupaleasy.com/podcast/2015/10/drupaleasy-podcast-163-drupal-pota...
made me write down the idea as an issue: #2590271: List events organized (from g.d.o event node organizer field data) as part of recognizing more than just code contribution

One more #2590487: List approved translations (from l.d.o) as part of recognizing more than just code contribution :)

Created #2592181: Allow to access user contributions stats through a public API on localize issue queue

I added a related issue to update the join blurb text.
#3168312: Update "get one of the cool Drupal Association badges" blurb to include DA membership is required to vote for community At-Large members on the DA Board