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
