From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Draft of Git Rev News edition 1 Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2015 21:49:41 -0700 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: Christian Couder , git , David Kastrup , Eric Sunshine , Matthieu Moy , Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy , Paul Tan , Johannes Schindelin , Dongcan Jiang , Jeff King , Doug Kelly , Bharat Suvarna , Kevin D , "Randall S. Becker" , Stephen Robin To: Thomas Ferris Nicolaisen X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Mar 23 05:49:51 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YZuJA-0007q7-Mt for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 05:49:49 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752012AbbCWEto (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Mar 2015 00:49:44 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.int.icgroup.com ([208.72.237.35]:51482 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751985AbbCWEtn (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Mar 2015 00:49:43 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 429373735B; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 00:49:43 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=ey8u2c8Fpn2fUiwUZNF4SMCV168=; b=WqbhiP RgRQB5ekWdkqjhMl3rjBfMH/frJpXqYuTGPwqzrxVBTf4VQbJgBU6xnkA0QMXawL C+8Fi8rplpIra6v5pEaqIqalTsE4q45KV1TsWu/2gl/p9JYeuv64TWY5PbYdmHcI u3diZJOWbev/sgcg5wYsBKjnAIfZfrZ+9keqw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=AtXTkOa76C4wgbd18Axja9yhMkeFLPZQ 4zyXOKVN6IVUKG8+5AIziy5ejBj40fLqWk9HP7CUiQkVwPQAwJNrx/lxNrX+EZcu EU5+6RnKw125EHOikNOBedQ50wHBJ2fLQSDsrAlglWqBtIKBvQAb/Lk5zr/ZXBii C4/AYxAU0tU= Received: from pb-smtp1.int.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 377DD37359; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 00:49:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [72.14.226.9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9B61437358; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 00:49:42 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Thomas Ferris Nicolaisen's message of "Sun, 22 Mar 2015 21:50:53 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 055AF472-D118-11E4-B7F3-6DD39F42C9D4-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Thomas Ferris Nicolaisen writes: > Good point. There hasn't been a decision on frequency. Weekly is a > good rhythm for publications seeking readership, but that's a lot of > work. My vote is we should first aim for a monthly consistent release. > I'll try working this into the draft, and Christian may change as he > sees fit. I agree weekly would be too much for any hobbist, given how high-volume our list has, but I probably shouldn't have said "periodical". Surely, aiming for consistent update is a very good thing to gain reader trust if anything else, but it is OK if it were "we will see a new release when enough interesting things happen", too. The primary reason I suggested to explicitly state the beginning of coverage is to set and manage the expectation of the readers. I think the current draft roughly covers 1/4 - 1/3 of discussions that happened in the month of March 2015 and nothing earlier than that, so "This issue covers what happened in March" or something would be appropriate. I'll throw a pull-request. >> - As an inaugural edition, we may want to have a word on >> how it came in existence by covering the discussion that >> led to its birth. Perhaps the discussion that led to the >> publication should be made into as an item on its own, >> next to "make git-pull a builtin", "Forbid log --graph..." etc. >> Because it is neither a review nor a support discussion, >> "Reviews & Support" heading may want to become >> "Discussions". I think that is a better title for the section >> anyway, if its purpose is "what happened on the list that >> are not visible from "git log", as I expect future editions >> to cover design discussions that advanced the shared >> understanding of a problem but not quite solidified to >> become a patch series. >> > > I hope it's OK that I leave this bit to Christian. I took a stab at this myself, and threw another pull-request. Thanks.