On 10 February 2016 at 14:17, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Matthew Miller
<mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 07:28:52AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> Changes are not used for that purpose. It is expressly the reason we
>> decided to stop calling them Features. Changes focus on the technical
>> content and impact for communication with Fedora developers. There's
>> nothing in this one that other developers really need to know about on
>> a project wide scale.
>>
>> If someone wants to market something, they should be working with the
>> docs and marketing teams directly.
>
> Hmmm. I'm not sure this is true -- or if it is, we might need something
> else. Marketing still uses the changes as a primary communication
> channel for this kind of thing. The Changes Policy page says "Public
> announcement of a new self contained change promotes cooperation on the
> change, and extends its visibility."
Sigh, really? Somewhere in the intervening years we've regressed then.
The problem we originally addressed was that marketing would scroll
through the Features and randomly pick some subset to promote the
upcoming release. It was terrible. They'd choose things like "new
update of the D programming language" because they didn't know what
that meant or if it was important. FESCo was similarly terrible at
figuring out which Features were neat marketing material. Some were
obvious, but most were not.
We should have something better to track highlighted features I agree. TO be honest I'm ambivalent at best myself over whether to list this as a change.
As pointed out it's backported to F23 as we didn't want to wait till F24 to get it out there with many people asking about it in the community.
Perhaps this should just serve to spur discussion on a better way to handle this type of thing?
>
> Honestly, I'm more than a little unhappy to be coming down on people
> for attempting to follow formal procedures and increase communication
> and cooperation.
I'm not coming down on anyone. I didn't say it wasn't important. I
didn't say we shouldn't do this. I'm asking why this is different
than any other new package addition we do in the distribution. I've
not gotten an answer at all. If the answer is "marketing" then we
should help them talk to marketing...
Marketing are aware the package exists ... I worked with them on the Fedora Magazine article(s) after all ... even got a >5000 view badge for it! ;)
Putting on my #centos community hat though ...
Recently there was an uproar in mailing lists there and we told people to pay attention to Fedora ChangeSets for a loose indication on things to be aware of coming up.
If new packages/technology aren't to be mentioned and only changes to existing technology that may affect $developer are we do need a better way of exposing new things that are not changes.
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
