Please sync the release notes http://mageia.org/en/1/notes/ with the wiki page http://www.mageia.org/wiki/doku.php?do=show&id=iso1%3Amageia1_release_notes The added parts are some more entries in these sections: Web Browsers and email clients Multimedia Applications (And, actually there shouldn't have been two pages... this divides the attention of people working on the one or the other :/; agreed the wiki page doesn't look too pretty, but still..).
(In reply to comment #0) > Please sync the release notes http://mageia.org/en/1/notes/ with the wiki page > http://www.mageia.org/wiki/doku.php?do=show&id=iso1%3Amageia1_release_notes > > The added parts are some more entries in these sections: > Web Browsers and email clients > Multimedia Applications That is: adding these sections, and making those translated in 20 locales? We can if that's really the last change, but I am not sure we can afford to update/translate the www pages every week for that. > (And, actually there shouldn't have been two pages... this divides the > attention of people working on the one or the other :/; Right, but this has been suggested/asked several times before the release. > agreed the wiki page doesn't look too pretty, but still..). Then for next time, we should rethink the release notes document type in the end, because of its size and format in its current form. Making it more automatic (fetching versions & names of important packages), split into several sub pages, really designed to make it more esay to grasp and read. And we would have needed to add a Google Analytics marker to the wiki so we know if people actually do read these notes.
CC: (none) => rdalverny
Release notes (as errata) is a living document, meaning it is subject to change. The only way to avoid this is putting much time and work into the release notes before they are published. So, almost all distributions who have such notes put them in a wiki. Constant translation of changes is always the issue. This can be done much easier and faster in a wiki. So, although it may have been suggested to put this on a web page does not mean it is the better solution.
CC: (none) => molch.b
I agree with wobo. Perhaps the solution is to have just a "highlights" web page with a prominent link to the wiki page with the details. There should also be a prominent link to the errata. The errata warns about what doesn't work and of potential problems (and possible solutions). I think that the errata can sometimes be more important than the Release Notes.
Erratas evolve, release notes don't. Once the release is done, we do not add feature nor change it, so the releases notes should not evolve and be fixed. Erratas are completed once bugs are found. So to me, releases notes should be prepared before the release. If we modify them after, that because we were late, ad the problem should be fixed by not being late. However, the problem is the errata, and we maybe need a better tool than the wiki. Errata is basically just a list of errors, with a classification ( right now, linear one, but tags could work too ). We also need to translate it, and wiki is not good for that. So to me : - releases notes on the wiki are just working document, like a draft - releases notes, once finalized, should be on the web site, and be prepared before so - we can translate it - wen can proof read it - erratas should be on wiki
CC: (none) => misc
(In reply to comment #1) > (In reply to comment #0) > > Please sync the release notes http://mageia.org/en/1/notes/ with the wiki page > > http://www.mageia.org/wiki/doku.php?do=show&id=iso1%3Amageia1_release_notes > > > > The added parts are some more entries in these sections: > > Web Browsers and email clients > > Multimedia Applications > > That is: adding these sections, and making those translated in 20 locales? We > can if that's really the last change, but I am not sure we can afford to > update/translate the www pages every week for that. > Your call, I don't manage the www pages :) IIRC, the release notes have always been a wiki page in mdv, that's an optimum model... FWIW, the multimedia section was created as a consequence of reading a forum topic where a user asked "why isn't vlc in the repos?"; it was a reminder, I did have it in my todo to add a multimedia section (multimedia support == more users IMO), just totally forgot (and unfortunately it wasn't spotted by anyone else). > > (And, actually there shouldn't have been two pages... this divides the > > attention of people working on the one or the other :/; > > Right, but this has been suggested/asked several times before the release. > I haven't seen such that suggestion; one caveat of having a web page vs. a wiki page, is restricted access, for example I can touch the wiki but not www. > > agreed the wiki page doesn't look too pretty, but still..). > > Then for next time, we should rethink the release notes document type in the > end, because of its size and format in its current form. Making it more > automatic (fetching versions & names of important packages), split into several > sub pages, really designed to make it more esay to grasp and read. > Sure; however I am not good with designing stuff, I can contribute to the raw release notes, then the web team can divide and split it to their hearts' content. > And we would have needed to add a Google Analytics marker to the wiki so we > know if people actually do read these notes. Sure, I'd like that too, if people don't read it, I shouldn't my time trying to make write a good page and also shouldn't waste translators' time working on it...
(In reply to comment #4) > Erratas evolve, release notes don't. Once the release is done, we do not add > feature nor change it, so the releases notes should not evolve and be fixed. > Erratas are completed once bugs are found. > > So to me, releases notes should be prepared before the release. If we modify > them after, that because we were late, ad the problem should be fixed by not > being late. > > However, the problem is the errata, and we maybe need a better tool than the > wiki. Errata is basically just a list of errors, with a classification ( right > now, linear one, but tags could work too ). We also need to translate it, and > wiki is not good for that. > > So to me : > - releases notes on the wiki are just working document, like a draft I disagree; any distro's wiki should be regarded as "the first and most important source of finding how-stuff-works in that distro"; a really good wiki becomes a source of info for Linux users in general, for example: http://wiki.debian.org/RpathIssue http://wiki.mandriva.com/en/Development/Howto/RPM_Advanced http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_create_an_RPM_package https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Font_Configuration these are not drafts, they're "documentation" articles. > - releases notes, once finalized, should be on the web site, and be prepared > before so Sure; though I have to admit that the release notes for Mageia 2 will be somewhat easier, we'll just copy the ones from 1 and edit them accordingly, i.e. the structure is already in place (even if webteam wants to split/divide it some more). > - we can translate it Translating is translating, web page, wiki page, printed page, it's all text that needs to be transformed from one language to another. [...]
Reread what I said, my point only apply to the release note on the wiki. So I do not even know with what you disagree with. ANd when I say "we can translate it", I mean we can translate it using proper workflow. Translating a always evolving document is the best way to have it uncompletely translated.
You said: âSo to me : - releases notes on the wiki are just working document, like a draftâ I replied: âI disagree;â wiki articles are not necessarily drafts. (Sorry, for the bad quoting in comment#6).
@ webteam ping?
CC: (none) => marja11
Pinging. because nothing happened to this report since more than 3 months ago, and it still has the status NEW or REOPENED. What are the plans for Mageia 2, in this regard?
WONTFIX for Mageia 1. As for next time (Mageia 2) : - if release notes are to change after the release (which I still find strange), I would have suggested that we kill the product release pages from www and let this live only on the wiki. - but I don't think it will fix the whole thing. - this may be related to bug 2565 where there's a proposed design to always show version of "big" components of a given release, once they are updated.
Status: NEW => RESOLVEDResolution: (none) => WONTFIX