On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Johannes Schlüter
<johan...@schlueters.de>wrote:

> On Wed, 2014-05-28 at 18:47 +0200, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>
> > I agree that this doesn't belong to the frontpage, nor do we did ever
> have
> > stuff like this there.
> > But I also think that removing it would do more harm than good at this
> > point.
> > I also think that having a easier to understand channel and posts like
> this
> > to communicate the roadmap and development of the project would be a nice
> > thing to have (as long as we don't try to use the frontpage for that).
> > So I would suggest checking out the updated version from Levi, and
> discuss
> > if it still has any controversial stuff.
>
> yes, I agree that we should have simpler to digest channels for users to
> follow with little effort. In the past we had Steph Fox for some time
> creating nicely written weekly summaries. recently I found Pascal Martin
> doing this on a monthly base:
>
> http://blog.pascal-martin.fr/post/php-mailing-list-internals-february-2014-en


I love the guy for that, and I'm proud that I have a small influence on
convincing him to start doing it in english:
https://twitter.com/Tyr43l/status/411187113334292480§


>
>
> Maybe we can also work with the Planet PHP guys to work on some
> highlighting of different authors/content ("internals related" /
> "framework related" / "app related" / ...) and maybe integrate it in
> some way with php.net or alternatively work on people.php.net to allow
> developers to post their view.
>
> However we should keep the focus of the php.net main news stream clear
> factual news. Advertise improvements made in 5.6 ("sell what we have")
>

agree


>
> Mind that compared to php.net the blogs and other sites have a quite
> small reach so damage they cause is quite little. A posting on php.net
> (especially when used by some "journalist" on the bi news sites) can
> create quite wrong expectations easily (the journalist has limited time
> for research and condenses it, the reader just picks up some sentences
> with even less context ...)
>

agree also


>
> So yes, we have room for improvement, and yes as a trigger for such a
> debate this post was helpful, but further discussion should be done
> aside from this precise "incident".
>
>
I wasn't trying to avert attention from this issue, but trying to be
productive/pragmatic and focus on what to do now/next, instead of playing
the blame game.

-- 
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu

Reply via email to