| 1 |
On Friday 04 November 2005 03:10, Nathan L. Adams wrote: |
| 2 |
> Stuart Herbert wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Tue, 2005-11-01 at 14:51 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
| 4 |
> >>Did you specifically ask them if it is because we have different |
| 5 |
> >> news in different locations? Somehow I think you're obscuring |
| 6 |
> >> some facts to make your own argument. |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > That seems an unpleasant accusation to make :( |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > The answer is that I didn't ask them if it was because we have |
| 11 |
> > different news in different locations. The question didn't occur |
| 12 |
> > to me. |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> >>The only problem that we have now with our multiple mediums is that |
| 15 |
> >> not all news is on all mediums. We should have the same |
| 16 |
> >> information going to all of these and let the user choose which |
| 17 |
> >> method they like for getting news. |
| 18 |
> > |
| 19 |
> > The critical difference between improving our existing mediums, and |
| 20 |
> > the emerge --news approach that I've proposed, is that emerge |
| 21 |
> > --news is the only approach that actively pushes news out to *all* |
| 22 |
> > users, and puts it in a place that is as guaranteed as anything |
| 23 |
> > else available to catch their attention. |
| 24 |
> > |
| 25 |
> > All the other approaches rely on the user going somewhere to get |
| 26 |
> > news, whether it's signing up to a mailing list, reading www.g.o, |
| 27 |
> > reading the forums, or whatever. Inevitably, this is only going to |
| 28 |
> > reach a smaller subsection of our user community. |
| 29 |
> > |
| 30 |
> > What I care about is that we've taken the right steps to put |
| 31 |
> > important information in front of *all* of our users (and our |
| 32 |
> > devs!). Even (especially?) the ones who are unable to keep up with |
| 33 |
> > the news as it is currently delivered. |
| 34 |
> > |
| 35 |
> > Making sure our users are well-informed improves the level and |
| 36 |
> > quality of service that we provide; it can only enhance our |
| 37 |
> > reputation; and it should also cut down on the amount of developer |
| 38 |
> > time that goes into post-upgrade support (leaving more time for |
| 39 |
> > package maintenance). |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> One source: http://errata.gentoo.org/ |
| 42 |
> |
| 43 |
> Push that out to as many alternate sources as you like (RSS feeds, |
| 44 |
> summaries in emerge --news, forums post, etc.), but make it known |
| 45 |
> that the website is *the* source (your alternate sources should point |
| 46 |
> back to it). |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
Well I don't like web so much for this kind of things, so fails me. |
| 49 |
I want the info where I need it. I don't have network access from all |
| 50 |
the machines I admin. So the best possible repository for the news is |
| 51 |
with the tree, because that is allways required. |
| 52 |
And because Gentoo has the control over the tree it is very trivial and |
| 53 |
secure way to spread the news. |
| 54 |
-- |
| 55 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives