Dne 7.12.2012 15:06, Jaroslav Reznik napsal(a):
----- Original Message -----
It doesn't matter from a "get this thing into Fedora" standpoint. It
very much matters from a marketing/communication standpoint. If it
didn't matter, Fedora Marketing wouldn't be picking specific items
out
of the overall Feature list.
The example I used in the meeting (which btw you should really go
read
the full logs at this point because all I'm doing is repeating
myself)
is that if you give a tech journalist a list of 10 Features, they can
write a pretty decent article about what is coming in the next Fedora
release. If you give them a list of 20-30 Features, they're either
going to ignore you entirely or pick 10 Features they think are worth
writing about.
That's the problem - FeatureList should not be used tech journalists
at all! It's internal tracking "tool". For journalists, we have Talking
Points [1] - originally written for Ambassadors! (And yep, good time to
spin it up). We have Beats... Announcements based on these with picked
up the most important features without going into too much details -
easier for journalist to create a good article. Feature list changes
too often, it could be out of sync, feature pages are written for
technical people, usually hard to understand etc...
And yeah, as I understand - Features were created for marketing
purposes. So let's not call that internal list features list but use
some other term and then with cooperation with marketing and docs
pick up let say ten most important things that happened in recent
release and feature them as The Features. But marketing POV should not
limit our development tracking ;-)
[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_18_talking_points
Jaroslav
Agree.
Some Features are more important than others. I want FESCo involved
in reviwing the ones that are big, have an impact across the distro,
are somewhat controversial, and have the potential to require a lot
of
coordination. Whatever we call those, that is what I want reviewed.
There is no reason why FESCo couldn't pick such important features by
themselves and review them. And keep the rest auto-approved. I guess our
views are not that different. You just try to apply some measure to
categorize features (or whatever we call those) where I say it is not
possible. The amount of response of ML might be good guide for that,
since we don't have any better.
Vít
josh
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
