[no subject]

If we pursued a high-profile approach, copying the mailing list with each 
action, question, and suggestion then we might be accused of taking over, 
bulldozing, or stepping on toes.

If we pursued a low-profile approach, discussing topics with directly involved 
individuals, then we might be accused of being very closed, or having a 
communication problem. 

Until people got used to the presence of the Sun documentation team, we thought 
that the best course of action would be the low-profile approach. In the event, 
we stand accused of the consequences of both courses of action. Somewhat galling 
considering the efforts we have made to be sensitive to other contributors. 

Therefore, I conclude that we should switch to the high-profile approach. At 
least then we can only be accused of the one set of misdemeanors. 

I disagree with Eric on quite a few points of detail, however I don't think it 
is worth getting into a "I think this" "you said that" discussion of Eric's 
specific points. Unless, of course, Eric wants to pursue specific points 
publicly. In which case I suggests he takes those points individually to the 
mailing list. 

Pat



John Fleck wrote: 
> 
> Let me suggest that, to the extent there is a communication problem
> here, more than a bit of the fault is my own. One of my roles was
> supposed to be as a liason between the GDP and the Sun Docs team, and I
> have clearly let both sides down here. Sorry.
> 
> Both Pat and Eric have said things with which I agree.
> 
> The Sun team's style of communication and that of the GDP are quite
> different. The GDP's traditional mode of communication invokes the
> mailing lists and IRC, both very public settings. My experience with you
> Sun team members has been that you tend to prefer private emails. I have
> tried to traverse this terrain carefully, respecting your style of
> communication by responding in private, asking permission if I felt it
> was necessary to elevate something to a discussion on the public list. I
> would frankly have preferred if y'all had jumped into the public fray
> more, on IRC and gnome-doc-list, but I have tried to respect your style
> of communication and work with it. In this regard, I think Eric's point
> is well taken - you have not been especially active in this part of our
> community life, where much of the planning of our big-picture ideas and
> goals goes on.
> 
> That said, however, in those private emails, in the blow-by-blow of
> working out who's doing what doc, and what their status is, I think the
> Sun team has been effective in communicating directly with the
> individuals involved. I can't speak for others here, but that certainly
> has been the case for gnome-utils, the users guide and the other bits of
> miscellany that we've been dealing with. The failing here was mine in
> not finding ways to elevate things to the public fora so others would
> know what was going on.
> 
> I think Eric's contention that the Sun team has run roughshod over
> individual documenters is unfair. It's tricky terrain to negotiate, but
> I know of no case where the Sun docs team insisted on having us use
> their doc over the objection of a doc's original author/maintainer. In
> this regard, my experience strongly supports Pat's contention that the
> Sun team has tried hard to do the right thing. (I can't speak to the
> gedit situation.)
> 
> So how do we ensure that we communicate better, so we give users what
> they deserve, which is the best-documented desktop there is?
> 
> Cheers,
> John
> 
> -- 
> John Fleck
> jfleck inkstain net (h) jfleck abqjournal com (w)
> http://www.inkstain.net http://www.abqjournal.com
> 
> "Sometimes, a diner is all about the mac and cheese." 
>   - Zippy the Pinhead
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-doc-list mailing list
> gnome-doc-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list