> On Tue, 09 Dec 2008 07:55:01 +0100, "Thorsten Leemhuis"
>
>> I wanted to put it in proper words, but I didn't get around to it, so
>> maybe I'll do it just quickly here:
> It's really appreciated that you took the time to give some feedback
> Thorsten.
Be careful what you say -- I suppose some people in fedora will call me
the always-ranting-guys or something like that ;-)
>> I like the FWN in general. But I noticed I often do not read them. They
>> for me are to long and contain way to many details -- the section "The
>> PATH to CAPP Audits" and "The Looming Py3K Monster" for example contain
>> a lot of information (which were hard work to collect),
> I've frequently wondered about that. Does anyone else agree that it's
> too long?
Maybe give it a small test in one of the next issues and ask readers
what they prefer?
> One problem with making things much shorter is that we can
> either produce what is essentially a simple list of topics, i.e.
>
> === CAPP Certification Requirements Cause Unease ===
>
> Changes made in 2005 to the permissions of shadow-utils tools in order
> to achieve CAPP certification were called[1] into question. It seems
> that they may complicate many of what are claimed to be the common use
> cases of Fedora. Steve Grubb, the shadow-utils maintainer, defended the
> permissions and explained CAPP certification.
>
> [1] Link to start of thread.
I would like something like that. That afaics should be enough to make
those readers took at the archives that are interested in more details.
And afaics it's a whole less work then try to sum up the most important
bits of a discussion as it was done in #155
>> but if I want
>> that in-depth details I'll go and read the thread on the list directly.
> Why wouldn't you just go and skim the archives directly then? It's easy
> enough to see what might be the interesting threads.
I for one read most of the important fedora lists. But not all -- I for
example stopped reading ambassadors and marketing some years ago and
would like to rely on FWN to highlight important discussions in a short
manner (if there are any); if I then find the topic interesting I'll
jump to the list to read the details
>> I think a little bit less (1/3 or 1/4 the length of what it is now)
>> could me more/better here.
> 1/3 or 1/4 would actually be a hell of a lot more work. The choices are
> either: 1) short, nearly content-free summaries which essentially
> mention the thread and nothing else, or 2)an attempt to provide an
> unpredjudiced digest.
What I meant is like something like "1)"; but sometimes discussions in
subthreads go into a sightly or completely different direction. Then it
might be worth to mention them as well. That is afaics done already now,
but it's done for way to much subthreads imho.
> [...]
>> And all those links in the text with sections like
>> ----
>>> [1] http://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2008-November/msg00420.html
>>>
>>> [2] http://libvirt.org/remote.html
>>>
>>> [3] http://www.avahi.org
>> ----
>> IMHO make it really hard to read.
> I would prefer all the links at the bottom of each item.
For text only: Sure. But in HTML/wiki I'd prefer to not see them at all.
> [...]
>> The OpenSUSE weekly news
>> http://en.opensuse.org/OpenSUSE_Weekly_News/49
>> look much more professional,
> For what value of "professional"? [...]
(a) looks way better
(b) you get more information without scrolling
(c) it's not that lengthy, which imho is a big plus in todays world, as
there are so many information you get offered in different places, hence
if I get to many details I'll move on elsewhere
>> are likely a whole less work and they even
>> get them translated because they are shorter/focus on the more important
>> things.
> "More important" than what? My impression is that you'd prefer it if
> there were no "Developments" or "Virtualization" sections and simply a
> list of what gets posted to @fedora-announce and some entries from
> Planet.
*I* for one would like to see the ten or twelve (?) most important
things *for the overall project* mentioned briefly and (in addition)
quick one-line links to other things that are also important, but do not
qualify as "most important".
The Art team for example does great work, but most of the stuff in
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FWN/LatestIssue#Artwork afaics is only of
interest for members of the Art team. Hence it should not be in the FWN;
instead it could go to their list if they want to sum up things. That
how I did it for EPEL when I was the EPEL Steerign Committee Chair; the
most important thins from those reports sometimes were mentioned in the
FWN (which also linked to the reports)
But again: that's just my option and maybe I'm totally alone with that.
>> Just my 2 cent as seldom reader. I thought you guys maybe wanted to
>> know. And don't let my option confuse you to much. Maybe it's just me.
> Specifics would be useful (like the comment about the links), otherwise
> I'm just left with the disappointed feeling that you don't like FWN.
Well, yes, I don't like it very much -- mainly because it for me
contains simply to many information to read each week. But I like the
general idea of FWN and that's why I shared my point of view. I didn#t
want to discourage or disappoint you.
> [...]
Cu
knurd
_______________________________________________
Fedora-news-list mailing list
Fedora-news-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-news-list
No comments:
Post a Comment