Regarding the section "Mass Package Rebuilds - Papering Over Cracks or Shaking the Tree?" on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FWN/Issue84

[Karsten Wade]

On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 19:21 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:

> Nevertheless could you guys sooner or later discuss the "Or are we
> allowed to fix errors (like the two things mentioned above) ourself if
> we find them?" question? tia!

How would you envision fixing them?

You could:

* Respond on your own blog
* Reply to f-announce-l with an errata
* Reply to the list where the erroneous report came from, making it
clear what the error is; then the reporter picks up the correction for
next week

It doesn't make sense to edit the Wiki; the content there is essentially
gone once it is written into the newsletter.

I think for something that is an obvious factual error on FWN's part, we
should issue an errata, to f-announce-l; that at least is what I
propose.  That makes the errata "official".  But if the situation were
different, such as you disagreeing with an opinion or interpretation,
then your only recourse is channels you have direct access to -- your
own blog, email lists, etc.

- Karsten
-- 
   Karsten Wade, 108 Editor       ^     Fedora Documentation Project 
 Sr. Developer Relations Mgr.     |  fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject
   quaid.108.redhat.com           |          gpg key: AD0E0C41
////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-news-list/attachments/20070423/ab81da41/attachment.sig>