David Lang [off-list ref] writes:
On Sun, 15 Mar 2015, Junio C Hamano wrote:
quoted
Christian Couder [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
I wrote something about a potential Git Rev News news letter:
I read it. Sounds promising.
Just one suggestion on the name and half a comment.
How would "Git Review" (or "Git Monthly Review", or replace your
favourite "how-often-per-period-ly" in its name) sound? I meant it
to sound similar to academic journals that summarize and review
contemporary works in the field and keeps your original "pun" about
our culture around "patch reviews".
...
I'll bet that LWN would publish, or at least link to, such articles on
a regular basis, and if you end up doing an in-depth writeup on a
particularly discussed topic, they would probably give it pretty good
visibility.
I hope you are right, but my observation of our coverage by lwn.net
is somewhat pessimistic. In our early days, our progress often used
to appear on the "Kernel Development" page, which I presume is the
most important page of the weekly for the kernel developers, but in
several months, the mention of us has moved two pages back to
"Development" and listed together with folks like OCaml Weekly,
PostgreSQL Weekly, etc. I would not count that as "pretty good
visibility" particularly.
I am taking it as a positive change, though. Once we got stable
enough not to be a roadblock for the kernel folks and proven
ourselves not to regress, our progress probably ceased to be
newsworthy to them ;-)
On Mon, 16 Mar 2015, Junio C Hamano wrote:
David Lang [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
On Sun, 15 Mar 2015, Junio C Hamano wrote:
quoted
Christian Couder [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
I wrote something about a potential Git Rev News news letter:
I read it. Sounds promising.
Just one suggestion on the name and half a comment.
How would "Git Review" (or "Git Monthly Review", or replace your
favourite "how-often-per-period-ly" in its name) sound? I meant it
to sound similar to academic journals that summarize and review
contemporary works in the field and keeps your original "pun" about
our culture around "patch reviews".
...
I'll bet that LWN would publish, or at least link to, such articles on
a regular basis, and if you end up doing an in-depth writeup on a
particularly discussed topic, they would probably give it pretty good
visibility.
I hope you are right, but my observation of our coverage by lwn.net
is somewhat pessimistic. In our early days, our progress often used
to appear on the "Kernel Development" page, which I presume is the
most important page of the weekly for the kernel developers, but in
several months, the mention of us has moved two pages back to
"Development" and listed together with folks like OCaml Weekly,
PostgreSQL Weekly, etc. I would not count that as "pretty good
visibility" particularly.
I am taking it as a positive change, though. Once we got stable
enough not to be a roadblock for the kernel folks and proven
ourselves not to regress, our progress probably ceased to be
newsworthy to them ;-)
It ceased to be about kernel development, and fell into the normal development
bucket :-)
Routine release notes (like your notes from the maintainer) do end up just
getting links to them as you have seen. But if someone is summarizing the
discussions on the mailing list, those will be a bit more interesting, and if
there is a particularly hot topic, the summary of that discussion can be a full
fledged article on it's own.
David Lang