| 1 |
On Thu, 2004-08-19 at 09:26 +0000, Kurt Lieber wrote: |
| 2 |
> If and when someone writes a GLEP, it needs to cover the following items: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> * how it will accommodate devs who do not already have a blog. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Thats really up to the devs themselves, there are numerous ways to get a |
| 7 |
blog going. I don't see why a planet GLEP should be so much more |
| 8 |
complicated by adding requirements like this (which seem mainly your |
| 9 |
personal view on what should be done afaics). |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> * how we will measure whether or not it is 'successful'. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Mere page hits ? If we'd stop publishing things based on success rate we |
| 14 |
might close down half the site I bet. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> At this point, I'm highly skeptical that enough people will use it to |
| 17 |
> warrant having it in the first place. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
There are several blogs by devs, they're just all over the place at this |
| 20 |
point. I'm sure there are a lot I don't even know about. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> So I'd like to see some |
| 23 |
> pre-established metrics that will help determine whether or not we delete |
| 24 |
> this thing down the road. Something like "X devs updating their blogs at |
| 25 |
> least Y times per month." The statistics should be reasonable -- remember, |
| 26 |
> we have something close to 300 developers nowadays. Just because 5 people |
| 27 |
> use this blog regularly does not mean it's a success. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
It's a planet, it's an aggregated feed of blogs that already exist. Even |
| 30 |
with a few devs posting only once a week there will be enough traffic. |
| 31 |
This sounds a bit like "If we don't get 10k syncs a day, we'll delete |
| 32 |
the whole tree, it's no use otherwise". We used to push new ideas, now |
| 33 |
we inhibit it with dry bureaucracy. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
- foser |
Archives