[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Release notes for F9

Paul W. Frields wrote:
On Thu, 2007-11-15 at 09:07 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Paul W. Frields wrote:

* For F9 the Release Summary should be drawn directly from the OverView
beat to the greatest extent possible.  The OverView beat should feature
content that is the most meaningful to end users, developers, and
community members using the Fedora platform.  If this means the Release
Summary is a verbatim copy of that beat, there is no harm in that.
This is frequently difficult because a number of things are yet undecided or not made clear when the release notes freeze happens. The underlying problem is that the development process of Fedora should be more organized and trying to find improvements in that is usually difficult.

Let's explore some ways to improve that situation then.  Part of the
support for this probably falls into John Poelstra's lap.  To me, this
means whip-cracking for folks to nail down features in time for us to
document them properly, so those documents can be translated in time, so
a package can be rolled... etc., etc.


Let's work together on this and build the docs schedule into the master schedule with hard dependencies on some of the other tasks. By laying down some of the different task durations and dependencies we can better educate everyone else why it matters that we hold to certain dates. Please ping me on IRC tomorrow.

Also, please come to the FESCo meeting tomorrow (1 PM EST) on #fedora-meeting where we are going to talk about what needs fixing in the feature process--particularly if you need better quality content about the features.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]