[Mageia-webteam] planet.mageia.org - info/discuss about the installation

[Romain d'Alverny]

On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 12:30, Michael Scherer <misc at zarb.org> wrote:
> If this is a desirable feature ( and that's IMHO a good idea ), then
> this must be supported by the tool ( or decide to patch it, but I think
> we previously agreed to avoid that when possible ). So while I have
> nothing against moonmoon ( and not because the author is from Metz ), it
> may not have this feature.

Sure. It looks like it doesn't. But that's not the hard part, I've got
a patch ready for that (highly unlikely to make it to the master
branch though).

We've got to decide whether we leave it to the author to provide a
feed filtered on her side, or whether we do the filtering based on
category (one is exclusive of the other, provided one would should the
former because categories are not available on their platform).

>> And yes, it has to be filtered by the Mageia topic; off-topic stuff
>> (regarding the project as a whole, it's not only about technical
>> stuff) should not appear in such a feed. And yes, we rely on authors
>> benevolence in this regard.
>
> Well, this has to be clearly said. That's not the same policy on all
> planet, and I think that having a tag is not enough ( see Adam W post on
> planet Mandriva, some people have seen them too off topic, but it has a
> tag Mandriva nonetheless ).

How do you suggest to manage it otherwise?

> Well, if I post in french ( which I often do ), should it be encouraged,
> refused, accepted ?

Should be accepted. If there is a significant number of posts in a
given locale, it may be the occasion to open a separate,
locale-specific planet. We can plan for this, or do it already
(English, French, Spanish, Portuguese, other?). What do you all think?

> Marcom, marketing or communication ?

Both.

> ( AFAIK, even with talk of merging them, they are still separate, no ? )

That's a separate issue (merging them has not been disputed since it's
been proposed; at most, encouraged).

> Shouldn't the board have the final say ( as one of the duty is conflict
> management ) ?

The board always has a final say, that's a given. But that should
still be exceptional and repeating it over and over won't entrust
teams on themselves.

> We can hardly call "community feed aggregation" a new field of
> experimentation, given the fact that it is a common practice in free
> software since years. And we can also take for granted that unspecified
> things will likely be interpreted differently.

That's the interesting part; to let thing go different.

Nonetheless, how would you act on this then? (filtering, policy for
aggregation, etc.)

Romain