Hi,
The Release notes may not be the best place for my suggestion, because the
problem I'm addressing comes after the release has been in use for a
while.
Maybe have a URL pointing to a fedora.redhat.com site that has more
up-to-date information. On the updated release notes page, which could
even double as a FAQ section, put the most frequently asked questions on
the mailling list under the appropiate section as you previously suggested
(install or package specific). This will reduce traffic on the mailling
list, provide an avenue for more efficient communication, not to mention
less work for those who actively answer questions on the ML. The con is
more work for redhat people, like sorting the ML by topic and choosing
what to put on the website!
Or scrap what I said above and make a Wiki-type site specific to each
release. This will enable the more industrious users who like to write to
create fresh documentation for fedora that right now only exists on google
or fedora mailing lists.
If what I suggested does not seem appropiate for 'simple' release notes,
take into consideration that those notes are fedora's first line of
defense in terms of informing users about what they are getting into!
Oh, yeah, thanx for fedora and I hope your new business plan works out.
Have Fun!
Dave
Edward C. Bailey said:
> Hello all,
>
> OK, now that I have your attention...
>
> I can make the claim I did in $SUBJECT because I wrote them (actually,
> others have made the same claim, but I digress)... :-)
>
> I'll be making changes in the way the release notes are done for Fedora
> Core 2, but first I want to collect some data.
>
> Basically, what do you want the release notes to look like?
>
> Currently, the release notes includes the following sections:
>
> o An Introduction to the Fedora Project (Should this be kept? Might
> be
> a good way for newbies to get hooked into the Fedora community)
>
> o Hardware Requirements (CPU, disk space, memory)
>
> o Installation-Related Notes (Anything that impacts the user during
> installation)
>
> o General Notes (Anything else that doesn't fall into any of the other
> sections)
>
> o Package Changes (packages that have been added/deleted/deprecated)
>
> o Kernel Notes (If it relates to the kernel, it goes here)
>
> These sections came into existence organically (meaning that nobody really
> thought about it :-) and I think it shows. The biggest thing I dislike
> about this structure is that the "General Notes" section becomes so
> overwhelmingly large that it's difficult to find anything in there.
>
> Some differing approaches come to mind:
>
> o Make it all package based
>
> Pros:
>
> - If you want to see whether package foo has anything of interest,
> it's easy enough to find out -- look in section foo.
>
> Cons:
>
> - Way too many sections with way too little content in each one
>
> o Make it partially package based (select which packages get their own
> section based on packages that are "important" or "big" or "changed"
> enough -- everything else goes into a "none-of-the-above" section)
>
> Pros:
>
> - Still pretty easy to find stuff (you look for a specific
> section,
> if nothing, look in "none-of-the-above")
>
> Cons:
>
> - How to select which packages get sections in a meaningful way
> and
> with a minimum of flames ("Hey, why didn't 'foo' get a section
> --
> it's really important/big/changed?")
>
> o Make it based on function (for example, "Desktop", or "Programming")
>
> Pros:
>
> - If chosen well, sections would make sense
>
> Cons:
>
> - While most packages would be easy to categorize, there will
> always be ones that might straddle sections -- what then? And
> there's still probably need to be a "none-of-the-above" section,
> though it should be minimal in size (if the functions are chosen
> well)
>
> My instinct says a function-based approach would probably be best, but
> maybe someone out there has an entirely different approach that would be
> even better.
>
> In any case, I'm sure that I can't do as good a job coming up with ideas
> as
> everyone reading this. :-) So, let's hear it -- what do you want the
> release notes to look like?
>
> Ed
> --
> Ed Bailey Red Hat, Inc. http://www.redhat.com/
>
>
> --
> fedora-list mailing list
> fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
>
