Tomorrow's Docs Meeting

[Eric Christensen]

On Wed, 2009-03-25 at 09:33 -0700, Karsten Wade wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:43:25AM -0400, Eric Christensen wrote:
> > I have further updated the agenda for tomorrow's meeting[1].  If you
> > have an opinion on how the Beta Announcement should read or what tool(s)
> > we will use to publish our documentation then you should be there! 
> 
> I have an update that is a potential show stopper.  According to this
> page:
> 
> https://translate.fedoraproject.org/tx/projects/docs-release-notes/master/
> 
> ... building with Publican means no translation using common L10n
> infrastructure.  Each translator would have to 'git clone' the
> repository or otherwise submit PO files more manually.
> 
> So that's a patch to Transifex needed for Publican; a few patches to
> Publican to make it produce RPMs compliant to Fedora Packaging
> Guidelines; and package freeze is coming very quickly on 14 April.

So those are pretty big problems.  We need to hash this problem out at
tonight's meeting.

> > I'd also like to use the Docs conference room
> > (2008) on the Talk server[3] to speed through some ideas.  
> 
> Some alarm bells went off last time we used the Talk server and made
> decisions.  I heard from a few people who were surprised about the
> process and missed the follow-up to the mailing list.  I don't think a
> summary of that discussion quite made it to the list.  We have that as
> a minimum requirement.
> 
> The issue with using Talk for a regular team meeting is that it raises
> barriers to participation, segregates the discussion, and has no
> recording/logging capability.
> 
> Even if recording were enabled, we would still have the barrier of
> spoken language being much harder to understand to non-native
> speakers.  Where an IRC log can be run through a translation engine to
> get the gist of a discussion, that is nearly impossible with an audio
> meeting.
> 
> I understand and agree with the value we get from high bandwidth
> verbal discussions, but is the added value worth all that we lose?

While I agree that there may be a higher barrier to participation I
think the benefits of having a real-time conversation that isn't typing
based would help with discussing issues.  I agree that we need to have a
scribe taking minutes to post to the list and to the wiki to maintain a
record of what has happened.  Right now we routinely carry items from
week to week because the discussion takes so long via typed words.  Plus
I feel as if there is a greater risk at misunderstanding someone's typed
words when written in a quick manner like we do in IRC.

What is keeping people from participating utilizing Talk?

> - Karsten

Eric
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/attachments/20090325/45facc80/attachment.sig>