Examples of good responses to the PackageKit issue

[Mel Chua]

Here we go. As promised earlier, I wanted to point out some examples of 
what I thought were great responses to press about the PackageKit issue, 
and the resources those responses used, for folks who want to help us go 
out and do likewise.

In general, the most helpful responses seem to have a section that goes 
something like: "We're working on changing this; see 
$location_of_discussion (and optionally, 
$list_of_resources_countering_specific_points). It would be great if you 
could update the story to reflect this. Thank you." (Any tips from folks 
with dealing-with-press experience?)

This topic is coming up in the FeSCo meeting tomorrow (Friday, 17:00 
UTC, #fedora-meeting), so it's still very much a story in progress.

== Examples ==

Susmit pointed out the responses - and ensuing article edit - on 
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/19/fedora_12_root_imbroglio/; I 
thought Adam's comment at 
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/19/fedora_12_root_imbroglio/comments/#c_629905 
was particularly nice.

The LWN article at http://lwn.net/Articles/362592/ posted a correction, 
http://lwn.net/Articles/362986/, immediately after Karsten's reply at 
the end, http://lwn.net/Articles/362996/, which is a nice short 
call-out. The 3rd paragraph of Mike's response to the correction, 
http://lwn.net/Articles/362995/, thanks people for their constructive 
criticism. (We should do more of that.)

Any other good examples of responses-to-press that people want to call 
out here?

== Resources ==

* The official Fedora response announcement (from Paul): 
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-announce-list/2009-November/msg00012.html

* An explanation of the background behind the change, by Owen Taylor: 
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2009-November/msg01445.html

* For users of Fedora 12 who would like to change PackageKit policy 
before the fix is pushed, see 
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/release-notes/f12/en-US/html/sect-Release_Notes-Security.html.

== For those who want to learn more ==

The FeSCo (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FESCO - Fedora Engineering 
Steering Committee) agenda ticket for tomorrow's meeting is 
https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/277: it's at 17:00 UTC in 
#fedora-meeting.

The bugzilla bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=534047 
Note: The full conversation thread there is fascinating but very long - 
if you're short on time, read a few comments and think about which ones 
(in your opinion) move us forward, and what comments (and responses) we 
want to emulate when we go out and comment on press articles. To point 
out a semi-random selection (I scrolled down and poked a few that caught 
my eye): the revision of release notes starting in 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=534047#c17 (and how they 
thread calmly through the rest of the discussion), the comments called 
out in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=534047#c99, and the 
response to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=534047#c236 
(both in bugzilla and on the mailing list linked to - it's Owen's post).

Transparency >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt.

--Mel