Re: Requesting Approval of Release notes general structure

[Claus Schwarm <c schwarm gmx net>]

Hi, Dave!

On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 09:28:36 +0100
Dave Neary <bolsh gnome org> wrote:

> This is an interesting way to look at it - I would have thought that
> if we always have the same headline "features" - usability,
> performance, i18n, a11y - don't we run the risk of exactly the
> opposite effect (same old same old) rather than the desired one
> underlining our commitment to those things?

Yes, most amateurs think like that, too. However, this is very unlikely
for two reasons. First, because we should write:

2.16: Feature Enhancements
2.18: New Features
2.20: Feature Improvements
2.22: Many New Features

instead of:

2.16: Feature Enhancements
2.18: Feature Enhancements
2.20: Feature Enhancements
2.22: Feature Enhancements

So we should slightly variate the headlines, but keep all the topics:
GNOME improves features, usability, performance, internationalization
and accessibility.

However, a "wear-off" effect is also unlikely because -- second -- you
overestimate the attention people spend on our release notes. A large
part of them has already forgotten whether they have read the last
release notes at all!  The majority would not remember what changes
were introduced in the last release. (Including me and I wrote the
notes!) This is why it would not matter if we would keep the words of
the headlines.

There's an easy way to check what happens if we don't repeat: Try to
remember the headlines in the newspaper (or on television) three days
ago. Or the most important ones during the last month! On the other
hand, try to remember advertising slogans of the week or the year.
What's the slogan of Marlboro, for example?

If you are like most people you can't remember a single headline
from a newspaper that is three days old. But I'm sure you remember
about "Come to Marlboro country" or something like that. Stuff that
changes often is hard to remember. Well-known psychological fact.

Btw., the 'old' structure has a front page for a reason: By featuring a
certain highlight of the release, people will be able to distinguish
the releases and think of each one as something unique: This is
another way to prevent the effect you described.

For example, the last release was about eye candy, this one might be
about a development suite, the next one might be about tracker and
searching. What was GNOME 2.12 about? Or GNOME 2.10?

> And I think it's reasonable to have a short section
> describing GNOME to first-timers in every release notes.

Nothing wrong with a _short_ section, ie. a sentence that has a link to
our 'About' web page. Or maybe a two sentences. However,
including a whole page directly at the beginning -- like in the last
release notes -- is a clear mistake done by amateurs.

Well, I don't mind, really. There's just one suffering when every
marketing newbie introduces changes without good reason or
understanding, and that's GNOME. :-(


Regards,
Claus