Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Christel Dahlskjaer <christel@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] July Council Meeting: Requested Agenda Item
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 23:01:57
Message-Id: 1149942391.9414.47.camel@gaspode
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] July Council Meeting: Requested Agenda Item by Lars Weiler
1 On Sat, 2006-06-10 at 10:07 +0200, Lars Weiler wrote:
2 > Congratulations. I just unsubscribed from the
3 > gwn-feedback-alias after reading your mail.
4 >
5 > * Christel Dahlskjaer <christel@g.o> [06/06/10 04:28 +0100]:
6 > > 1. Reliability. The GWN claims to be a weekly publication, yet it
7 > > frequently fails to publish without prior warning. There was no edition
8 > > this week, and Patrick Lauer says that it is "unknown" whether there
9 > > will be an edition next week as Ulrich Plate is AWOL.
10 >
11 > Several times Kurt or I took over the job of publicing the
12 > GWN when Ulrich asked us. So, there is a backup, but he
13 > didn't asked for this week.
14
15 I am glad to hear that backup has been used in the past, and I hope that
16 it will be again.
17
18 > > 2. Permissions. Although it could be considered flattering that the GWN
19 > > should choose a developer's blog as inspiration for an article, they
20 > > should ensure that they have the developer / author's permission before
21 > > quoting them (see previous complaints by brix, ciaranm and others).
22 > >
23 > > I also believe that when posting an article or interview, a copy should
24 > > be sent to the relevant people to ensure that they are ok with what is
25 > > being posted (my dev of the week interview, for example, was rather
26 > > screwed up and misrepresentative). When someone contacts GWN to have
27 > > something corrected, it would be appreciated were the GWN staff to at
28 > > least deign to acknowledge receipt, even if for some reason they choose
29 > > not to honour the corrections or post a retraction (although refusing to
30 > > publish corrections is extremely insulting to those wronged).
31 >
32 > And I expect the same from you. You should ask the affected
33 > people first before starting a discussion about them on our
34 > public mailing lists. This is a device I can give you for
35 > further userrelations-activities.
36
37 I have actually contacted Ulrich on several occasions, he chose not to
38 get back to me. And I have spoken a fair bit with Patrick, and from
39 speaking with Patrick it is quite obvious that the GWN could do with
40 some help, and I am hoping that my addressing the problems we can pool
41 together and find ways of helping them.
42
43 > > 4. Credit. Care should be taken to ensure that crrect credit is given.
44 >
45 > It is. Either as "Author" or "Contributor".
46
47 Or it is totally lacking, like in the above mentioned blog scenario.
48
49 > > Another thing that concerns me is the way the articles are written. It
50 > > is blatanly obvious that the GWN writers are not native English speakers
51 > > as both the grammar and the flow of the articles is far from attractive.
52 > > Having read through the archives, I notice that there was once a time
53 > > when the GWN was a great publication, and I would like to think that it
54 > > could become great yet again; in its current state, though, it is doing
55 > > more harm than good.
56 >
57 > It's quite interesting to see, that the GWN and also
58 > Debian's Weekly Newsletter is run by Germans mostly. Is
59 > there a problem with native speakers to run a periodically
60 > newsletter for a long time (> 3 years)?
61
62 No, there isn't a problem with it. However, as I understand it the GWN
63 is translated into N languages, and I would presume the german version
64 to be the one which reads better. Could it be an idea to have someone
65 whos first language is English look over and improve upon the English
66 version? I know we already dot the i's and cross the t's, maybe it would
67 be of benefit if someone worked a bit on how it flows.
68
69 > > Lack of content and poorly written or incorrect articles are often
70 > > justified by the GWN team on grounds of overwork and insufficient
71 > > manpower. When I asked why they were not recruiting, I was informed that
72 > > no-one has any interest in contributing. Upon speaking with others,
73 > > however, I find that this is not the case -- people are interested, but
74 > > fear (and rightly so) that their work will be edited in such a way that
75 > > it is no longer something with which they want to be associated.
76 >
77 > Subscribe to the gwn-feedback-alias and read or comment the
78 > submissions to the GWN. Make sure that every user will
79 > receive and answer. And forward questions to the
80 > arch-teams. Isn't that userrel's job? I didn't saw your
81 > contributions there yet.
82
83 I wasn't aware the gwn-feedback alias was public, if it is then I would
84 be more than happy to subscribe to it and read and comment to every
85 user. Would I be stepping on anyones toes by doing so? And if the GWN
86 would like to off-load some stuff onto Userrel, then userrel would be
87 more than happy to help. We already have a GWN representative and he
88 knows that several of the userrel team would jump at the chance to help
89 out with various GWN related bits.

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature