Hi,
Quim Gil a écrit :
> Perhaps Dave's original email -
> http://mail.gnome.org/archives/marketing-list/2006-September/msg00096.html -
> and all what we discussed in the "User oriented release notes" and "About the
> 2.18 release plans", including my
On Tue, 2006-09-26 at 11:53 +0200, Claus Schwarm wrote:
> Do I miss something?
Perhaps Dave's original email -
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/marketing-list/2006-September/msg00096.html -
and all what we discussed in the "User oriented release notes" and "About
Hi,
On Sun, 24 Sep 2006 16:13:55 +0200
Quim Gil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We need a coordinator for the 2.18 release notes, the sooner the
> better. Be it Lucas, Dave, Claus or whoever wanting to push this
> until the release day.
>
I can sent reminder e-mails after the beta releases to a m
Hi,
Quim Gil a écrit :
> We need a coordinator for the 2.18 release notes, the sooner the better.
> Be it Lucas, Dave, Claus or whoever wanting to push this until the
> release day.
I have never contributed in any substantial way to the release notes,
and it's unlikely I'll have the time to do so
We need a coordinator for the 2.18 release notes, the sooner the better.
Be it Lucas, Dave, Claus or whoever wanting to push this until the
release day.
I have enough coordinating the wgo revamp and some related goals,
sorry. :/
On Tue, 2006-09-12 at 17:15 -0300, Lucas Rocha wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If
Hi,
If this is a task everyone see as necessary (I think so), I can do
this RoadMap information gathering and organization. Dave, still
needing someone to do this?
p eace
--lucasr
2006/9/12, Dave Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Hi Quim,
>
> Quim Gil wrote:
> > In short: let's propose to the rele
Hi Quim,
Quim Gil wrote:
> In short: let's propose to the release team a call for 2.18 goals to the
> developers.
Maybe you missed this mail I sent to desktop-devel-list last week:
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2006-September/msg00114.html
I have a file containing all of th
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 10:19:18PM +0200, Quim Gil wrote:
>> > Of course, we can test it. Let's start another threat where everybody
>> > can make suggestion on the goals for the next release. It may be
>> > interesting to see whether we can agree on something, and what this
>> > will be. :-)
>>
Hi :o)
On Mon, 2006-09-11 at 16:31 +0200, Claus Schwarm wrote:
> (1) You should not waste your time to work-around 'bugs', anyway. You
> should fix the bug if possible.
>
> (2) People want the new information quickly - see "Inverted Pyramid
> Format" for news stories. [1]
>
> (3) The release
Hi :o)
On Mon, 2006-09-11 at 12:57 +0200, Quim Gil wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-09-10 at 22:28 +0200, Claus Schwarm wrote:
> > Apple formulates for ordinary users because it has products for
> > ordinary users. We don't.
>
> This is why we need a common understanding of what are our targeted
> audiences
On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 10:19:18PM +0200, Quim Gil wrote:
> > Of course, we can test it. Let's start another threat where everybody
> > can make suggestion on the goals for the next release. It may be
> > interesting to see whether we can agree on something, and what this
> > will be. :-)
>
> As s
In short: let's propose to the release team a call for 2.18 goals to the
developers. The responses would be listed at
http://live.gnome.org/RoadMap . After October 18th [End of new (app)
modules proposal period] we extract these goals in another wiki page
where release team and marketing team with
Hi,
let me dive into the discussion from a journalist's perspective:
On 11.09.2006 18:44, Murray Cumming wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-09-11 at 18:23 +0200, Claus Schwarm wrote:
>
>>But the main point is: 99.9% of the release notes readers know what
>>GNOME is, I'm sure.
>
> I'm not sure about that. I'
On Mon, 2006-09-11 at 18:23 +0200, Claus Schwarm wrote:
> But the main point is: 99.9% of the release notes readers know what
> GNOME is, I'm sure.
I'm not sure about that. I'd say it's maybe 50%. New sites post "GNOME
2.16 is out" stories, and people follow the link. They know it's
something new,
--- Claus Schwarm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Next, do you even have enought overview on the
> rather extensive GNOME
> platform? I know I don't.
Well someone sure as hell needs to.
___
Now you can scan emails quickly
--- Claus Schwarm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The
> 'users == grandma'
> myth already hurt us several times (think Spacial
> Nautilus, GNOME
> Screensaver, etc.)
Spatial Nautilus is excellent.
And GNOME Screensaver is NOT a grandma product,
because it uses abstract concepts such as "session"
an
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 16:53:38 +0200 (CEST)
"Murray Cumming" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Press releases are for a different audience (journalists), who are
> used to looking for the overview at the end, in the description of the
> organisations mentioned.
>
I think this is a misunderstanding.
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 21:40:35 +0100 (BST)
Joachim Noreiko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But Quim's general point is sound: that instead of
> each stable release being 'well this is the stuff we
> managed to get done the last 6 months', we should
> think about trying to plan what each release should
> On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 02:16:56 +0300
> Enver ALTIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 2006-09-09 at 12:40 +0200, Claus Schwarm wrote:
>> > Our release notes should not be a workaround for our ugly 'About'
>> > section. This is a bad and useless habit of the GNOME release notes.
>>
>> I can't
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 12:57:43 +0200
Quim Gil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Certainly GNOME does not sell (but see below). Does that mean that
> Apple (or Microsoft) are in a different league?
It just means that there's a need for Apple to write for ordinary
users. They interact with consumers di
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 02:16:56 +0300
Enver ALTIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-09-09 at 12:40 +0200, Claus Schwarm wrote:
> > Our release notes should not be a workaround for our ugly 'About'
> > section. This is a bad and useless habit of the GNOME release notes.
>
> I can't see why it
Hi Claus,
On Sun, 2006-09-10 at 22:28 +0200, Claus Schwarm wrote:
> * GNOME does not sell an operating system.
> * GNOME does not sell computers.
> * GNOME has no stores to sell stuff.
Certainly GNOME does not sell (but see below). Does that mean that Apple
(or Microsoft) are in a different l
On Sat, 2006-09-09 at 12:40 +0200, Claus Schwarm wrote:
> Our release notes should not be a workaround for our ugly 'About'
> section. This is a bad and useless habit of the GNOME release notes.
I can't see why it's a bad habit, I'd love if you could explain.
Thanks,
--
Enver
signature.asc
Des
--- Claus Schwarm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Concerning your "vision" stuff: This looks like
> bullshit to me. Maybe
> I've seen to many clueless marketing people speak
> like that, and my
> impression is wrong. However, it looks like
> bullshit. Sorry. :-(
I think that 'vision' is one of thos
Hi, Quim!
You didn't mention the obvious differences of GNOME and Apple:
* GNOME does not sell an operating system.
* GNOME does not sell computers.
* GNOME has no stores to sell stuff.
Apple formulates for ordinary users because it has products for
ordinary users. We don't.
The next thing y
El dg 10 de 09 del 2006 a les 07:56 +0100, en/na Joachim Noreiko va
escriure:
> But there is this perception that developers on Free
> projects "work only on what they want to work on" and
> "only on what's fun"
Like Claus says, "Yeah, nice story. ;-)" :) The GNOME release cycle
has rules, deve
--- Quim Gil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> - Integrate marketing and ""business"" visions with
> the technical vision
> that is guiding the 2.18 release. Since day zero.
> Someone
> needs to think what these bodies need and how the
> next release is going
> to help them, be useful to them.
I
Long email, sorry. This thread hits a topic that got me thinking a lot
in the last weeks.
First of all, thank you specially to Claus, Vincent, Panos and Alex
Smith. Thanks to them we had 2.16 release notes on time.
> http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/index.html
Right, let's start doing things
Hi :o)
I really don't know how to argue this any better, it just seems to be
becoming silly.
I will simply restate that to effectively promote GNOME through our
website, things should be presented in a simple non technical way,
technical information being presented in separate sections for those
Hi,
On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 15:22:15 +0200
karderio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Perhaps, but in any case we still need to cater for the lowest common
> denominator : grandma :)
>
Well, as I said previously: Grandma's are never going to read our
release notes, unless their are interested in tec
Hi :o)
On Sat, 2006-09-09 at 13:10 +0200, Claus Schwarm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 02:08:09 +0200
> karderio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > What could take the edge off the buzz a user should be feeling when
> > reading about GNOME ? Compilation options is one, links to "technical
On 9/9/06, Andreas Nilsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Luis!
> Isn't Apples equivalent of our release notes more likely this?
> http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/index.html
> And yeah, they kick our asses in catchy copy-writing here too :)
That is more equivalent, but I guess I'm suggestin
Hi,
On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 02:08:09 +0200
karderio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> What could take the edge off the buzz a user should be feeling when
> reading about GNOME ? Compilation options is one, links to "technical"
> fd.o standards another, there's the "code cleanups" section... Not to
> sa
Hi Luis!
Isn't Apples equivalent of our release notes more likely this?
http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/index.html
And yeah, they kick our asses in catchy copy-writing here too :)
I agree that we're a bit too techy from time to time though, even for
the target audience people-who-reads-comp
Hi,
On Fri, 8 Sep 2006 20:42:04 -0400
"Luis Villa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Compare and contrast our notes with:
> http://www.apple.com/getamac/
>
> (ignore the videos, look at the text, what they are bragging about,
> etc.) Luis
>
You're comparing apples with oranges.
Our release notes
Note that we can't possibly make something as attracting like that, and the reasons have nothing to do with the marketing team. Those notes focus on what the user can do. Gnome as it is with only gnome can do all the standard stuff, and that isn't impressive. We can't put gimp, nor abiword, nor gnu
Compare and contrast our notes with:
http://www.apple.com/getamac/
(ignore the videos, look at the text, what they are bragging about, etc.)
Luis
On 9/8/06, karderio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi :o)
>
> I just took a second look at the 2.16 release notes[1]. Although they
> were a very interes
Hi :o)
I just took a second look at the 2.16 release notes[1]. Although they
were a very interesting read, on occasion they came over as perhaps a
little too technical, leaving maybe the ghost of the impression that
GNOME could be a desktop "by devs for devs".
Please don't get me wrong, the notes
38 matches
Mail list logo
