On Fri, 2010-06-18 at 12:42 -0400, James Laska wrote: > I agree that simply having less of something doesn't make it better. > > Perhaps I should clarify my intent. By fewer, it was implied that the > extra time would be spent ensuring that each event was as successful as > it could be. My concern was whether we were over committing on our > capacity to support and host test days. If this was the case, I'd > prefer hosting several really good events, instead of a lot of poorly > attended test days. > > Of course, if it's not the case ... then no action required. I never got the feeling in the F13 cycle that I was half-assing any of the Test Days I was involved in, but I wasn't involved in all of them =) I promoted the Graphics Test Week more widely than other Test Days, which probably plays some part in its greater popularity, but that's not because it takes a lot of time to do the publicity and I didn't have the time to do that for other Test Days; it's more a conscious choice to only do wide publicity for Test Days which feel like they're legitimately of interest to a wider community. I find it hard to justify asking general-interest Linux news sites to carry an announcement about, say, an Anaconda storage Test Day. It just feels like something which is only of interest to the Fedora community. I can certainly see the theory in your idea...but I'm not sure it's actually what limited Test Day participation for F13 in practice. Did anyone else who was involved in F13 Test Days feel like they could have benefited from more time to build interest in their event? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
