Re: Annual Report next steps

[Allan Day <allanpday gmail com>]

Hi Oliver,

Thanks for the suggestions.

Oliver Propst <oliver propst gmail com> wrote:
...
> First I want to really recommend the person who compose the
> final document to read the articles in the wiki [1] as those
> contains the latest edits, including grammar.

Tobi reviewed the changes on the wiki, and I've imported his edits.

...
> The article about GUADEC that are included in latest PDF are much longer
> and more detailed then the current version on the wiki [2]. Frankly I
> don't think people are interested in reading such long, detailed report
> about an event that took place one year ago. I think its sufficient to
> provide a shorter version such as the one on the wiki, if people are
> interested in more details there is always the news achieves (we could
> refer to that) [3].

I've modified the GUADEC article slightly, to make it a bit more
focused and easy to digest. I do think a longer version is desirable,
though - the whole point of the Annual Report is to find information
about what the GNOME project did in 2013. If we cut it down to the
bare bones, it won't contain very much of anything, and some of the
details we do include won't be meaningful. Why mention the names of
our keynoters without including details about who they are or what
they actually spoke about?

> In the release article I find this sentence troubling:
> "Wayland is the next generation technology for display and input on
> Linux."
>
> Its very strong wording that I don't think its an accurate, description
> of the situation, sounds more like a PR statement from a company
> department, I do not think we need to play that role.

I don't think the statement is inaccurate at all. If you look at who
is using Wayland, or going to be using Wayland, it is absolutely
accurate.

Allan