In going through the wiki removing hash marks, I noticed that there are a number of places where there is content that we want to keep for F11, so I guess we probably don't want to be too reckless in the pre-F11 cleanup.
On the other hand, I was reminded while doing that is that one reason that we may want to issue an F10 update is that some F9 content, which was inappropriate for F10, made it into the F10 release notes. So we definitely want to be a little more thorough in our scrubbing.
--McD
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 07:27:27AM -0500, John J. McDonough wrote:
In going through the wiki removing hash marks, I noticed that there are a number of places where there is content that we want to keep for F11, so I guess we probably don't want to be too reckless in the pre-F11 cleanup.
On the other hand, I was reminded while doing that is that one reason that we may want to issue an F10 update is that some F9 content, which was inappropriate for F10, made it into the F10 release notes. So we definitely want to be a little more thorough in our scrubbing.
When scrubbing in the past, I tended to look at the page history for each beat to see when the last update was made. If it was made before the GA release notes push, I knew the beat contained nothing new. If there was something new, I'd try and retain that piece, which I'd locate using the diff function on the wiki history page.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul W. Frields" stickster@gmail.com To: "John J. McDonough" wb8rcr@arrl.net; "For participants of the Documentation Project" fedora-docs-list@redhat.com Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 7:56 AM Subject: Re: Preparing for F11 Release Notes
When scrubbing in the past, I tended to look at the page history for each beat to see when the last update was made.
The things that drove that comment were a little unusual. There is some content, for example around locating codecs, that is probably worthwhile to include in the release notes even if it doesn't change. On the other hand, it is easy to overlook some of that stuff that needs update. At the last minute we scrambled around to get updated Flash installtion instuctions on the wiki, but the inappropriate Fedora 9 content actually appeared in the release notes (I just now filed a bug even though I noticed that shortly after release -- my bad).
72/73 de WB8RCR http://www.qsl.net/wb8rcr didileydadidah QRP-L #1446 Code Warriors #35
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 08:09:22AM -0500, John J. McDonough wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul W. Frields" stickster@gmail.com When scrubbing in the past, I tended to look at the page history for each beat to see when the last update was made.
The things that drove that comment were a little unusual. There is some content, for example around locating codecs, that is probably worthwhile to include in the release notes even if it doesn't change. On the other hand, it is easy to overlook some of that stuff that needs update. At the last minute we scrambled around to get updated Flash installtion instuctions on the wiki, but the inappropriate Fedora 9 content actually appeared in the release notes (I just now filed a bug even though I noticed that shortly after release -- my bad).
Right, and I think there's also some precedent for this in the Installer beat, where there are some average-sized changes from release to release, but even the unchanging information is extremely valuable to the user.
Paul W. Frields wrote:
Right, and I think there's also some precedent for this in the Installer beat, where there are some average-sized changes from release to release, but even the unchanging information is extremely valuable to the user.
Is it worth moving that kind of information out of the release notes into the wiki or published guides and just add a reference? The installer beat information could move into the installation guide for the most part, I think.
Others have pointed out that carrying the same information across releases makes it difficult to spot what has truly changed which I think is a important point.
Rahul
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 08:39:27PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Paul W. Frields wrote:
Right, and I think there's also some precedent for this in the Installer beat, where there are some average-sized changes from release to release, but even the unchanging information is extremely valuable to the user.
Is it worth moving that kind of information out of the release notes into the wiki or published guides and just add a reference? The installer beat information could move into the installation guide for the most part, I think.
Others have pointed out that carrying the same information across releases makes it difficult to spot what has truly changed which I think is a important point.
Actually, that is a good point. We would want to keep a few factoids there like minimum memory and so forth, because the Release Notes are probably an order of magnitude more consulted than the IG. Those factoids also happen to be the most likely to change over time, so this sounds sensible to me.
Whoever handles the Installer beat should probably check this strategy with the Anaconda team to make sure they're OK with it too.
Paul
I think we really need to define what the scope of the Release Notes is going to be. Will it be just new features, known issues and important bugfixes?
or
will it be all that + a mini installation guide? take the "Live" [1] section as an example. Live images are nothing new in f10.
also after going though the release notes over the last couple of days, i feel that they could also do with an overhaul on how the information is structured and consequently presented... A solid structure of the release notes would also make it significantly easier to maintain the wiki <---> docbook relationship.
cheers, ryanlerch
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Beats/Live
Actually, that is a good point. We would want to keep a few factoids there like minimum memory and so forth, because the Release Notes are probably an order of magnitude more consulted than the IG. Those factoids also happen to be the most likely to change over time, so this sounds sensible to me.
Whoever handles the Installer beat should probably check this strategy with the Anaconda team to make sure they're OK with it too.
Paul
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 08:28:39AM +1000, ryan lerch wrote:
I think we really need to define what the scope of the Release Notes is going to be. Will it be just new features, known issues and important bugfixes?
or
will it be all that + a mini installation guide? take the "Live" [1] section as an example. Live images are nothing new in f10.
Excellent point. The combined audience for the Release Notes has several objectives:
* evaluating whether to try this release * feature high points * are there deleterious or advantageous changes? * (?) what's different from [Distro_X]? * first-timer trying to understand Fedora offerings * [Others?]
IMHO, we want to duplicate content only judiciously, but reuse it effectively. The Release Notes and the Installation Guide are definitely trying to achieve different things, but we also want to make sure people finish looking at the Release Notes by saying, "Wow, that sure was informative. I feel ready to decide what to do now, and I know what my next action needs to be."
also after going though the release notes over the last couple of days, i feel that they could also do with an overhaul on how the information is structured and consequently presented... A solid structure of the release notes would also make it significantly easier to maintain the wiki <---> docbook relationship.
No argument here! When we said we wanted fresh leadership on these docs, it wasn't lip service. I for one may pop up to discuss things as a fellow Docs contributor, but that's what mailing lists and a community process are for. I see any overhaul as natural, and something to be expected and welcomed.
On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 08:28 +1000, ryan lerch wrote:
I think we really need to define what the scope of the Release Notes is going to be. Will it be just new features, known issues and important bugfixes?
or
will it be all that + a mini installation guide? take the "Live" [1] section as an example. Live images are nothing new in f10.
also after going though the release notes over the last couple of days, i feel that they could also do with an overhaul on how the information is structured and consequently presented... A solid structure of the release notes would also make it significantly easier to maintain the wiki <---> docbook relationship.
I know that I have always read the release notes for Fedora ever since I started using it regularly (FC5 I believe), but I have also been following the release notes for Gnome and also KDE 4 when it came out. And I have to say, maybe it's just me, but I was far more "wowed" and "awed" by the Gnome & KDE release notes than the Fedora ones. I still got what I wanted from the Fedora ones, but the Gnome & KDE ones really gave me that desire to try them out.
Maybe we can take some lessons from them? Also, I think they tend to be more of "release announcements" rather than "release notes", if such a distinction can be made. They tend not to include much information such as known issues, unless buried deeper or linked away, which is something I think we can go for or benefit from as well.
________________________________________________________________________
Basil Mohamed Gohar abu_hurayrah@hidayahonline.org www.basilgohar.com
On Sat, 2009-01-31 at 00:15 +0800, Basil Mohamed Gohar wrote:
And I have to say, maybe it's just me, but I was far more "wowed" and "awed" by the Gnome & KDE release notes than the Fedora ones. I still got what I wanted from the Fedora ones, but the Gnome & KDE ones really gave me that desire to try them out.
So in addition to the facts we should throw in some sparkly objects that make people NEED to come try it out. The world might end unless you try out our new features!
I agree. I've never read the GNOME or KDE release notes but I will now. If we are missing something that could entice people to come on over then we are missing out.
-Eric
On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 11:25 -0500, Eric Christensen wrote:
On Sat, 2009-01-31 at 00:15 +0800, Basil Mohamed Gohar wrote:
And I have to say, maybe it's just me, but I was far more "wowed" and "awed" by the Gnome & KDE release notes than the Fedora ones. I still got what I wanted from the Fedora ones, but the Gnome & KDE ones really gave me that desire to try them out.
So in addition to the facts we should throw in some sparkly objects that make people NEED to come try it out. The world might end unless you try out our new features!
I agree. I've never read the GNOME or KDE release notes but I will now. If we are missing something that could entice people to come on over then we are missing out.
I guess the main difference I recall are: * Mentioning of what makes $thisrelease better than $thisrelease-- * A reasonably flat layout in one document. No more than 2 levels of hierarchy (easy to digest) * Anything that needs more details is linked elsewhere * The document itself looks pretty. If there is a compelling new style, then that theme is used (e.g., KDE). If the website has a nice interface, than that style is used (Gnome). I fear, currently, Fedora Project is lacking on both fronts, at least on the web side.
________________________________________________________________________
Basil Mohamed Gohar abu_hurayrah@hidayahonline.org www.basilgohar.com
This link was posted in response to a similar thread i started on fedora-devel, and provides a good user "review" of the release notes...
http://thorstenl.blogspot.com/2008/12/read-same-paragraphs-every-half-year.h...
cheers, ryanlerch
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 3:12 AM, Basil Mohamed Gohar abu_hurayrah@hidayahonline.org wrote:
On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 11:25 -0500, Eric Christensen wrote:
On Sat, 2009-01-31 at 00:15 +0800, Basil Mohamed Gohar wrote:
And I have to say, maybe it's just me, but I was far more "wowed" and "awed" by the Gnome & KDE release notes than the Fedora ones. I still got what I wanted from the Fedora ones, but the Gnome & KDE ones really gave me that desire to try them out.
So in addition to the facts we should throw in some sparkly objects that make people NEED to come try it out. The world might end unless you try out our new features!
I agree. I've never read the GNOME or KDE release notes but I will now. If we are missing something that could entice people to come on over then we are missing out.
I guess the main difference I recall are: * Mentioning of what makes $thisrelease better than $thisrelease-- * A reasonably flat layout in one document. No more than 2 levels of hierarchy (easy to digest) * Anything that needs more details is linked elsewhere * The document itself looks pretty. If there is a compelling new style, then that theme is used (e.g., KDE). If the website has a nice interface, than that style is used (Gnome). I fear, currently, Fedora Project is lacking on both fronts, at least on the web side.
Basil Mohamed Gohar abu_hurayrah@hidayahonline.org www.basilgohar.com
-- fedora-docs-list mailing list fedora-docs-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
docs@lists.stg.fedoraproject.org
-
Basil Mohamed Gohar -
Eric Christensen -
John J. McDonough -
Paul W. Frields -
Rahul Sundaram -
ryan lerch