Am 31.08.2010 19:45, schrieb Patty Langasek:
> Am I reading this right?[..]
> 2) If you are unable to make the change, find someone who can and /do/ it.I can't believe what I read. If the intention of this whole thread was,
to demotivate me from forwarding debconf press announcement to the
regular debian channels: Congrats, you nearly reached your goal.
Just for the record: There was a report, I explained, why I didn't
considered it a bug. Several people misunderstood me / only saw a part
of the communication, and I corrected them. And in the end the "bug"
was fixed, quite some time before you send your mail.
Alexander, who still wonders, why everything press related is always a
PITA, when debconf is involved
I can't speak for always, but I can say that for almost the year leading up to approximately one or two weeks prior to DebConf, unbeknownst to most, including myself, there was no active DebConf press team lead. While there are certainly lessons to be learned here, this situation has, at least for now, been addressed.
I do see DebConf press and Debian press teams as definitely a great starting point for collaboration. I'd even be willing to go as far as saying that as acting DebConf press team lead, I would be willing to relinquish that role to my Debian press counterpart, now that there is one, if everyone thought that was for the best. (How does the saying go? "Tag you're it!") :) In all seriousness, I do think that in instances were there are role overlaps between Debian and DebConf, we should take into consideration the feelings and wishes of the people doing the work, and privately reach out to them to see what they want, before arbitrarily pushing a new reporting structure on them. (Trust me we don't want to demotivate anyone, as the work is hard enough as it is, and we are short of workers).
Alexander, I'd be willing to help you start capturing the information I've learned and I have been handed down, in my two years with the org. (mostly as a very junior member of the team). Maybe in a press-team wiki? Maybe you can add what you have learned and we can also work to document some of the pain points where we can strive for improvement.
P.S. - I also want to apologize and take full responsibility for the 10th vs 11th error. I can't even claim ignorance of the facts, as I had been explained the issue ages ago, but for some reason when proofreading it didn't notice it, nor did the various other people on the mailing list and irc that reviewed it.