On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 09:05:52PM +0200, Joey Schulze wrote:
> At first I would say that times.debian.net/news.debian.net would and
> should be the resource to use for news about the project that don't
> classify as press releases - for whatever reason. If the press team
> should author articles on blog.d.o what would make these articles
> different from our press releases?
So, let me stress that I didn't ask the press release to *author* the
blog posts. I expect the blog post to be authored by the current authors
of {times,news}.debian.net (in the beginning) and later on I foresee
blog posts authored by others. As DPL, for instance, I'll be glad to
contribute blog posts from time to time and I'll welcome posts
contributed by others. Still, there's a need of some control, or of an
"editorial board" if you want. And that is something that I think should
be delegated to the press team, also for coordination with other source
of Debian news. Additionally, as I don't want to "gift" extra work load
to the press team, I think it would be wise to have someone else on
board which would like to do that specific job, in coordination with
you.
About the difference among blog posts and press release, I re-iterate
the argument in my first mail: the language registry of a blog post and
of a press release is completely different. Our press releases are
serving us well (thanks to the outstanding job of the press team), but
they are not addressing the needs of those that traditionally follow
blogs and not press releases. The fact that we do have such kind of
public is testified by the popularity of Planet. Having blog.d.o will
reach that public, providing official content (that Planet cannot offer)
where needed.
> Traditionally, Debian makes a lot of use of mailing lists. Aside of
> the regular press channels debian-news and debian-announce we have
> d-d-a (and d-i-a) where all developers can post information on. Both
> resources are well used.
I personally don't buy this argument. Technology evolves, geeks evolve,
and our ability to communicate should IMHO evolve accordingly.
Let me try to also put it another way, what do you think we will be
doing _worse_ with respect to now in adding blog.d.o?
If it is just a matter of not adding extra load to press, I apologize
because it was not my intention to propose that. The service can very
well start separately, but I would very much like to think of it as
something that eventually will be merged. So I was just considering that
it would have been wiser/easier/better to do it the proper way since the
very beginning.
> Instead of trying to establish just another Debian service I would be
> more happy to strengthen one of the currently under-recognised
> services such as news.debian.net or times.debian.net
They are under recognized also because there are no synergies among
them: one should subscribe to both. Also, the fact that they are so
strictly identified leaves no place for other contributed posts. Merging
them would offer the corresponding benefits in my opinion.
Thanks for this discussion!
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..| . |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...........| ..: |.... Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature