Re: Release notes

[Davyd Madeley <davyd madeley id au>]

People are trying to flush me back out of the woodwork!

After a year of what can only be considered zero-involvement, I would
love to get back into the swing of things.

I'm seriously out of the release cycle though. To be honest, I'm not
even sure what version of GNOME is being released. This may cause
problems for me in identifying new features.

It would be good if I actually had people to work with who are currently
not feeling the same level of shell-shocked disconnection that I am.

--d

On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 15:17 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 02:35 -0200, Lucas Rocha wrote:
> > Hi Elijah,
> > 
> > Some quick comments:
> > 
> > - Finding writers is always a tough task. GNOME Journal has a pool of
> > random writers. Maybe it's a good place to make a call for volunteers.
> > 
> > - However, the most demanding/relevant work around the release notes
> > is not the writing itself but gathering information from developers
> > about the major achievements in their modules. Finding people with
> > competence, energy and patience for doing this is quite hard.
> 
> Yes, a series of people have offered to help over the years, mostly
> failing. Most never do anything and don't respond when it comes time to
> do work. One or two (For instance, Jorge for 2.20) do at least write
> some initial text, which is very useful, but almost nobody does the
> research or write-ups of research, even when I've tried to coordinate it
> via wiki and emails. I'm not optimistic.
> 
> But Davyd Madeley is the exception. He's actually managed to do at least
> one whole set of release notes and done it very well. I've tried to
> persuade him to lead 2.21/22 because I don't want to do it every time,
> without success so far. If he agrees then I'll promise to do 2.23/24 as
> a thanks, but I'm not planning to do 2.21/22.
>  
> >  The
> > general process for organizing the release notes is documented[1] but
> > the actual work for making it is not. I'm sure Murray can comment more
> > on this.
> 
> Yeah. I've added some more suggestions to the existing page:
> http://live.gnome.org/ReleaseNotes
> 
> I don't think there's much more to it. You just have to be persistent,
> on-schedule, and ready to admit you don't understand stuff.
> 
> Elijah's idea of sneak-peak articles is fine, and would help provide
> ideas. However, these generally end up having a totally different focus
> than the real release notes because 
> - People get confused about what is in GNOME and what is not.
> - People have only a fraction of the information that we have when we've
> done the research. For instance, I only got the information about
> Evolution for 2.20 at the last minute and I then decided to make it the
> major item.
> 
> Unfortunately, journalists often seem to use these very early articles
> to write their reviews of the actual release, instead of using the
> actual release notes, so they are often hopelessly wrong. I don't know
> what to do about that.
> 
> > - The Roadmap is supposed to help the preparation of the release
> > notes. However, we didn't provide good ways to "validate" the Roadmap
> > info (for some modules) at the end of the development cycle so that it
> > could be realibly used as a basis for the release notes. This is
> > something that I plan to improve for the 2.22 release.
> > 
> > --lucasr
> > 
> > ps: Murray is probably quite busy after the birth of his kid. Maybe it
> > will take some time until he replies.
> 
> Yeah. I have small windows of opportunity.
> 
> > [1] http://live.gnome.org/ReleaseNotes
> > 
> > 
> > 2008/1/6, Elijah Newren <newren gmail com>:
> > > Hi Murray,
> > >
> > > I'm horrible.  I meant to check with you a few months ago on this
> > > topic, and then it got lost in my big TODO pile.  Really sad,
> > > particularly because we've lost some good time to act on this.  :-(
> > >
> > > We talked about the release notes at the last release team meeting (in
> > > September?).  While I knew the release notes were important, I don't
> > > think I ever realized just how important the release notes were until
> > > seeing the contrast in the last two cycles; 2.18 and 2.20 didn't seem
> > > very different to me quality-wise in any overall measurement other
> > > than release-notes (where they were drastically different).  Yet 2.18
> > > got us awful press and 2.20 was received totally differently.  So, I
> > > think you did the most mportant job in 2.20, and you made it totally
> > > shine.  Thanks a million.
> > >
> > > The reason release notes came up was not just much better reactions we
> > > got due to your hard work; we were also worried about too much work
> > > being placed on your shoulders.  We were wondering what we might be
> > > able to do to get a team of volunteers to help you out with this task,
> > > and wanted to solicit your advice.
> > >
> > > In addition to some potential names of people that we might contact to
> > > ask if they'd be willing to help, there was one idea that was thrown
> > > out:
> > >   - Try to find volunteers that are willing to write up sneak-peek
> > >     articles, much like Davyd's old articles.  Promote this and try to get
> > >     multiple people writing such articles.
> > >
> > > If this could be pulled off, it has a couple potential advantages:
> > >   - This would provide material for the person who writes the final
> > >     release notes, hopefully making their job easier.
> > >   - This gives us a good idea of how thorough volunteers are and
> > >     whether they understand the size of the task (we're guessing that
> > >     most volunteers just don't understand how big the "release notes"
> > >     task is and buckle under pressure after having already
> > >     volunteered)
> > >   - Having multiple sneak-peek articles would rock anyway
> > >   - If someone fails to write up a sneak-peek article, we really don't
> > >     lose too much, unlike what happens when release notes writers fall
> > >     through.
> > >
> > > But that may be a big if, and there may be better ways of encouraging
> > > new contributors.  Thoughts?
> > >
> > > Thanks for all your hard work,
> > > Elijah
> > >
-- 
Davyd Madeley

http://www.davyd.id.au/
08B0 341A 0B9B 08BB 2118  C060 2EDD BB4F 5191 6CDA