Re: Example of targetted release notes

["Ken VanDine" <ken vandine org>]

Maybe we should use data from this sort of study to create "Themes"
for a release.  So specific topics we think projects should be paying
attention to during the entire development/release cycle.  This could
also help feed a roadmap.  Then the release notes could be written
from that point of view, how did we improve the things we said needed
the most improvement.

--Ken

On 3/15/07, Gervais Mulongoy <gervais mulongoy gmail com> wrote:
> The short of it is everything needs to be made easier. You tell me, do you
> ever get frustrated with GNOME? Does it ever do things in a convoluted way?
> Take this recent discussion about music playback.
>
> Maybe marketing can put together a study and answer a couple questions, such
> as what the users like and don't like about GNOME. And what would they like
> or what would they like from the pool of Topaz ideas. This assumes that
> marketing doesn't already have these answer, and we just need to put them in
> writing.
>
> The data from this study could then be turned either into a set of
> specifications. Such as one for music playback, video playback, file/content
> management (tagging, searching), hardware/device management (including sound
> cards, monitor, disks, peripherals, power), hardware sensors/monitors,
> networking, publishing (graphics, documents), production (multimedia
> presentations which including radio shows, music tracks, slideshows, etc).
> Basically the kinds of specs one finds on freedesktop, but just for GNOME.
> Again, this assumes that these types of documents don't already exist and if
> they do, please let me know because they might need some revision and a
> focus groups can be useful here.
>
> So even while GNOME's development groups remain autonomous, these documents
> or specs can be used to formalize agreements and relationships because road
> maps can be hard to keep up to date or made to use a consistent layout.
>
> My experience trying to produce release notes has lead me to believe that
> plan and execute now for the future because trying to whip things up at the
> last minute ends up with frustration and arguments. I hope it makes sense to
> all to identify all the stakeholders and their interests, to formalize these
> into some sort of document like a spec, and then to move forward.
>
> If this doesn't contribute to the current discussion, my apologies, and
> please disregard.
>
> -Gervais.
>
>
> On 3/15/07, Dave Neary < dneary free fr> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Coincidentally, RHEL 5 came out teh same day as GNOME 2.18 - so we got a
> > chance to compare how Red Hat did its release to how we did it.
> >
> > Have a look at this:
> > http://www.redhat.com/videos/real_tech/
> >
> > This is a series of videos, each one focussing on a real benefit of RHEL
> > 5. Ignore the fact that it's videos, and that they spent lots of time &
> > money on them.
> >
> > Concentrate on this: each one is a story.
> > "Hi, I'm an IT manager. Here's a problem I had. Here's how RHEL 5 fixed
> > it." They don't talk about how something is done, they don't talk about
> > virtualisation, they talk about problems and solutions.
> >
> > In techie release notes, you might have one item about virtualisation,
> > but you wouldn't make the link to real user problems (managing legacy
> > systems with new servers, adding redundancy without adding hardware,
> > etc). I think that Red Hat really got their focus right on this.
> >
> > Also, this: They're clearly aimed at CIOs, sysadmins, IT managers. Not
> > too many "Hi, I'm a mother of 4, and RHEL helps me print my photos
> > easier". Targeting. The law of sacrifice. Red Hat make their money in
> > data centers and on servers, not on the desktop, and they're not going
> > after that market. That doesn't mean that they're not interested in it,
> > and they're certainly not going to refuse your money if you want to
> > install RHEL on desktops, but taht's not where their target is.
> >
> >
> > So - provocative question of the day - what are the problems which our
> > target audiences have with their computer infrastructure (that is, ISDs,
> > hobbyists, public administrations)? And what did GNOME 2.18 do to
> > address those problems? How about GNOME 2.20? Do we have a concrete idea
> > of the things that need to be made easier?
> >
> > Cheers
> > --
> > Dave Neary
> > dneary free fr
> > --
> > marketing-list mailing list
> > marketing-list gnome org
> > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
> >
>
>
> --
> marketing-list mailing list
> marketing-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list