[Mageia-webteam] planet.mageia.org - info/discuss about the installation

[Romain d'Alverny]

On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 18:19, Michael Scherer <misc at zarb.org> wrote:
> Le lundi 31 janvier 2011 à 16:50 +0100, Romain d'Alverny a écrit :
> No, I do not say that using a tag is not good on a technical level. I
> say that the definition should be IMHO clearer than "using a tag". Ie,
> what do we expect on the tag.

For RSS 2.0/Atom feeds (required), the item (so the blog post) must
have a "mageia" category at least (case insensitive).

> Well, to me, this look like the job of communication more than
> marketing, but maybe I mistake the purpose of the marketing team.

Both teams are merged into one for the time being; so tasks/purposes
are interleaved for the time being. Should it grow, we'll see.

>> The board always has a final say, that's a given. But that should
>> still be exceptional and repeating it over and over won't entrust
>> teams on themselves.
>
> If we entrust the marketing team to do conflict management and editorial
> control, it should be clearly said.

It has been said from the first day that, for the sake of subsidiarity
and relevance, each team has a say on its own matters. That's what
trust and delegation is about: we expect teams to self-manage and
manage their work well.

Planet is a communication matter, it is handled by the communication
team (here, marcom as it is interleaved). All the rest (webteam,
sysadmin) in this regard has only a provider role.

Now, as has been said too, should a team-level decision raise issues
on its own, it escalates to Council, then to Board, if necessary.
Nothing new.

> Now, if I wanted to do it, I would still aim for having the minimal
> requirement of maintainability. People ( as long they have a email
> alias, ie are peers ) decide what they blog, how they blog, etc. Some
> kind of wiki way applied to feed aggregations. I would even push to
> delegate the feeds in ldap so people can change themselves without
> anyone intervention.

Patch CatDap for that, then. Maybe. But it looks more complex than it
should be for the time being. Later maybe.

> First, I would try to clearly articulate the goal of the website. Having
> "a regular stream of news about Mageia" is not the same as "discovering
> the life of contributors". For example, the aforementioned chocolate
> cake pictures is likely not ok if the goal is to speak only of Mageia.

You're mixing several things. The "website" as such has several roles;
the planet is one tiny role among others in the "self-recognition &
promotion of contributors thoughts" part.

> This allows to know if we want someone see the word fuck or not.

I don't care about setting rules for that - that's the comm'team job
and I believe that for the beginning, this can be left to authors'
common sense. And we will see how it evolves. Saying that it should
first relate to Mageia is enough. Comm'team will be free and welcome
to chart it otherwise (now or later).

> We may not want to have strong political comments on the frontpage of the
> project ( As said, I personally wouldn't care, but I guess that's not a
> universal view ).

The planet won't be on the frontpage (where only official news of the
project will be, speaking of news feeds), it's a separate page, on its
own first, of which posts may be syndicated somewhere in a "news" or
"community" area in the website.

Romain