[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

[fab] Proposed Plan for Split of Fedora-Announce-List



seth vidal wrote:
On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 11:53 -0400, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
It's not a particularly ballsy decision.  It just needs to get made.  :)


I guess I'm missing what the big controversy is.

We'd be best off producing messages in such a way and using such
technology that we can easily convert them into N different formats. Or
better yet, that someone else can for themselves.


1) Split fedora-announce-list
-----------------------------
Make fedora-announce-list into a low traffic, high relevance list of
only announcements.

2) Redirect package update announcements onto its own list
----------------------------------------------------------
fedora-package-announce exists for people who want to receive update
announcements of any Fedora package.  People can login to change their
subscription to include or exclude different channels within
fedora-package-announce.  So you could ask for only Fedora 5 (including
FC5, FE5 and FL5).

This package announce list only temporarily will be the only solution.
When the next objective is achieved, then people will have other options
to view the same information.

3) Make package announcements backed by a database
--------------------------------------------------
We should have all of this information stored in a database.  Generated
from this database are a number of both push & pull representations like:
- Package update and security advisory list announcements
- RSS feeds
- Canonical package update website (links from RSS feed point here)
- Metadata for pirut and pup

http://people.redhat.com/wtogami/temp/fedora-updates.png
Luke Macken's previous work on the Fedora Update tracking system that we
currently use only internally give us a head start in these goals.  It
would be fairly easy to build upon this existing foundation, but only
after we achieve a few other objectives.  (Putting the Fedora Updates
system in the public requires some design considerations for proper
handling of Embargo and possibly other aspects related to the Fedora
distribution merge.)

Thoughts?

Warren Togami
wtogami redhat com


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]