On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:18 AM, Allan Day <allanp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Emily Gonyer <emilyyr...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Meeting at GUADEC sounds like a great idea. When would work for everyone? >> I don't know of any BOF that I'm 100% attending yet. >> > > Yep, a meeting sounds good. I'm fully booked for the first two BoF days > (30th & 31st of July), but could do the 1st if anyone is free then. > Otherwise, we can try and organise something informally during the > conference itself. There should be time. > > It might also be good to continue the discussion here - that'll give > people who won't be at GUADEC (/ME waves to Sri and Christy) a chance to > comment, and will maybe help to spur discussion when we do meet. So let me > sketch a rough plan for how news could work... > > Groovy. > A key goal here needs to be keeping any system we have a simple and > lightweight as possible, while still ensuring a regular stream of engaging > and high-quality posts. Some ideas: > > * We aim to have about three posts a week, including a mix of short and > long posts on different subjects > I'm not sure if that is sustainable. We will need a larger pool of volunteers to do this I think. (which is good for me, because I think we have bought in a bunch of people, but we lose them because there is no work to be done) > * We have a set of guidelines on when to post (ie. mid-week, preferably > during daylight for North America and Europe) > * We have a small editorial team consisting of three or four people > * The schedule for posts is planned in advance by the editorial team at a > monthly IRC meeting > This is good, nice flow. > * Each post has an assigned author and editor. It is the editor's job to > ensure that the post is delivered on time and that it is checked for > quality before posting. > Yep. > * If a post does not meet its deadline, we publish something else instead > (hopefully from a queue of backup material) and keep it in a holding > We will need to build some of these things up. We have a number of older articles that didnt get published that we could draw on. > pattern until a space in the schedule becomes available > * The editors maintain a document containing ideas for content, which > anyone can add to. This gets reviewed at each monthly editorial meeting > > Sounds good. Although some stuff might be good to work on immediately because it is a hot topic that week rather and you want to capitalize on it instead of waiting till the end of the month. > The existing gnome.org site provides almost all the infrastructure we > need for this to happen. We can use it to store all our queued material > (perhaps with a separate category for backup posts). We can easily use it > to give people author and editor roles. > > Thanks to our wonderful volunteers! > Our list of post ideas can be a simple wiki page on live.gnome.org. > > The only infrastructure question is where to keep the publishing schedule. > My personal view is that something semi-private to the editorial team is > best for this; a Google Doc would work well, although maybe there's a free > option that could work? > > We should prioritize with a free option (free as in freedom) over google docs. We had a discussion on this already previously when it came to using other google services like hangouts. > Thoughts? Opinions? > > Put it out there for you :) > Allan > -- > IRC: aday on irc.gnome.org > Blog: http://afaikblog.wordpress.com/ > > > -- > marketing-list mailing list > marketing-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list > >
-- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
