That's totally acceptable as a direction. The reason I asked is that your original draft looks rather engineering-focused. The release cycle is interesting to engagement contributors, but I'm not sure the specifics of the release schedule are the main pieces of information they need.Yes, I was just looking at the teams and then trying to map it to our release cycle. So, yes it was engineering focused from the point that I wanted to contributors to know how every team fits into the release.
It might be a good exercise to review what we think the most critical pieces of information are for new engagement contributors who are completely new to GNOME and Free Software. Things that come to my mind are:Yes!* We produce two releases a year, March to September and September to March.* GNOME doesn't have its own product: distros ship our code.* Different companies and volunteers work on the project.* Diverse teams and activities are involved in producing our releases - documentation, translations, accessibility, design, QA, etc* The main activities that the Engagement Team does, and the times throughout the year that they happen.It would be nice to also add the critical conferences that we attend like FOSDEM. I'm not sure how to describe our social media activities, but likely we will need another infographic.
I've had a rough go at sketching out an infographic that communicates some of this information. Some things are missing, and some parts are quite rough:This is excellent actually, way way better than anything I would have come up with! Thank you! I would like to see the months stand out just a tad more. There was a little bit of confusion on which direction I should be reading since I didn't initially interpret the solid circle as a terminator. But otherwise, it is pretty good.