Re: Release notes for F9

[John Poelstra <poelstra redhat com>]

Paul W. Frields wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-11-15 at 09:07 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > Paul W. Frields wrote:
> >
> > > * For F9 the Release Summary should be drawn directly from the OverView
> > > beat to the greatest extent possible.  The OverView beat should feature
> > > content that is the most meaningful to end users, developers, and
> > > community members using the Fedora platform.  If this means the Release
> > > Summary is a verbatim copy of that beat, there is no harm in that.
> > This is frequently difficult because a number of things are yet 
> > undecided or not made clear when the release notes freeze happens. The 
> > underlying problem is that the development process of Fedora should be 
> > more organized and trying to find improvements in that is usually 
> > difficult.
>
> Let's explore some ways to improve that situation then.  Part of the
> support for this probably falls into John Poelstra's lap.  To me, this
> means whip-cracking for folks to nail down features in time for us to
> document them properly, so those documents can be translated in time, so
> a package can be rolled... etc., etc.

Yes!

Let's work together on this and build the docs schedule into the master 
schedule with hard dependencies on some of the other tasks.  By laying 
down some of the different task durations and dependencies we can better 
educate everyone else why it matters that we hold to certain dates. 
Please ping me on IRC tomorrow.

Also, please come to the FESCo meeting tomorrow (1 PM EST) on 
#fedora-meeting where we are going to talk about what needs fixing in 
the feature process--particularly if you need better quality content 
about the features.

John