Nate Graham ha scritto:
> On 5/12/19 12:54 PM, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote:
>> Hi Jonathan,
>>
>> Am Samstag, 11. Mai 2019, 19:54:20 CEST schrieb Jonathan Riddell:
>>> The purpose of the bundle is that it takes the release process out of the
>>> hands of projects which don't want to do that bit of faff. It's a nice
>>> service to those projects. It's very successful at that and I don't see
>>> any purpose in discussing changing what can be included or what should be
>>> included.
>>
>> na, you got me wrong here. That proposal about removing the bundle wrapper is
>> not about changing the process and shifting work. It is solely about changing
>> the communication to the public/users about what is released those days.
>> Instead of saying "we release A (which contains X, Y, Z)" one would say "we
>> release X, Y, Z.".
>> And for the internal work there would be some dedicated name to refer to this
>> release work group ("Fourmonthsgroup" or better).
>>
>>> Nobody has an interest in separating it up. My only objective
>>> is to give it a slightly more descriptive name which is catchy for the
>>> public.
>>
>> What do you mean by "catchy"? For whom should it be catchy and compared to
>> what? IMHO a catchy name for something which only exists in the release news,
>> but no-where else (at least in user experience, when using apps they do not
>> know what belongs to this bundle) only makes things worse, as every time one
>> says "Bundle name" one does not say the actual names of the actual software
>> modules, while its those which endusers only see.
>> And as long as "Itsy Bitsy Teenie Weenie KDE Sofware Modules" still means a
>> random collection software, where no-one really knows what is inside besides
>> some fanboys, this does not improve things when trying to inform users that a
>> new version of their favourite application is out. And at the same time
>> trying to tell others that all those different applications exist and what
>> their normal names are.
>>
>> "Kontact", "Dolphin", "Gwenview", "Konsole", "Rocs", "Cantor", "Kate",
>> "Okular", "Kdenlive" should be the catchy names. no?
>
> I think we all agree that the announcements need more content about more of
> the apps, but that's really on those apps' authors to add that information.
> There's only so much the release team can do since they're not necessarily
> domain experts on all the apps. I always add detailed release notes for the
> apps I follow (Dolphin, Gwenview, Okular, Kate/KWrite, Konsole, and Spectacle)
> but I can't do it for every app in the bundle. There just isn't enough time
> for me to follow *everything*.
>
> But I have a hard time envisioning what the title/header of your proposed
> announcement looks like. It can't have 20 apps and their version numbers in
> it; that's way too long. That information has to go in the body, but it
> already does (well, not the version numbers, but that's trivial to change). So
> if we're not mentioning the apps and their version numbers in the title, then
> the title is going to continue to be in the form of "Today we announce A",
> whether "A" is whatever we settle on, be it "KDE Applications YY.MM", or "KDE
> Apps Bundle YY.MM" or even just "the third 2019 KDE apps release day". That's
> really no different "KDE Apps Bundle 19.12".
I would argue, again, that there is a difference. "KDE Applications YY.MM" and
"KDE Apps Bundle YY.MM" sound like product names. "the third 2019 KDE apps
release day" does not.
See also:
https://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/fifteen-new-gnu-releases-in-the-month-of-august
--
Luigi
