[opensuse-marketing] news.o.o articles discussion
Hi all, I was approached by a few people about a recently published article (1) on news.o.o with regard to people publishing articles on it. Those who were concerned felt that news.o.o. was not a place where people should be posting articles about non-official packages and "random home repos" (2). The thought was that it wasn't a good idea for several reasons, but if someone did want to promote packages, it should be packages that pass QA, license reviews and are accepted into the official repo. The author updated the article after this topic was brought to his attention, which now includes "As a member of the openSUSE community, I am working to add a new package to Factory and all help from the openSUSE community is welcome. The packages <https://software.opensuse.org/package/ritchie-cli> are currently in my OBS home project available to all openSUSE users interested in testing." This addition shows the intention of the author to bring the package to the official repos, inform the community of the efforts and provides a call to action asking for community help. Part of the intention to moving to the new format on news.o.o was to get more contributions and also move aware from https://lizards.opensuse.org/ Are we as a project and marketing ok with people posting info on news.o.o. as long as it's community related? Should we come up with some basic standards to put in the README.md on https://github.com/openSUSE/news-o-o? What are the thoughts about this? Should we bring this topic up to opensuse-project@opensuse.org? v/r Doug (1) https://news.opensuse.org/2020/08/31/Ritchie-CLI-for-openSUSE/ (2) https://github.com/openSUSE/news-o-o/pull/60 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-marketing+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-marketing+owner@opensuse.org
Am Mittwoch, 2. September 2020, 11:25:52 CEST schrieb ddemaio:
Part of the intention to moving to the new format on news.o.o was to get more contributions and also move aware from https://lizards.opensuse.org/
Are we as a project and marketing ok with people posting info on news.o.o. as long as it's community related?
I always recognized news-o-o as some magazine where anything is possible as long as it's somehow related to openSUSE. The recent trouble roots from the name: "news" sounds like it's the distro-official stuff while "magazine" or something similar shows it's more wide scope. So that's something we should discuss.
Should we come up with some basic standards to put in the README.md on https://github.com/openSUSE/news-o-o?
Yes, resulting from the above topic.
What are the thoughts about this?
Should we bring this topic up to opensuse-project@opensuse.org?
Would be okay for me but not necessary. vinz. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-marketing+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-marketing+owner@opensuse.org
On 9/2/20 11:42 PM, Vinzenz Vietzke wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 2. September 2020, 11:25:52 CEST schrieb ddemaio:
Part of the intention to moving to the new format on news.o.o was to get more contributions and also move aware from https://lizards.opensuse.org/
Are we as a project and marketing ok with people posting info on news.o.o. as long as it's community related?
I always recognized news-o-o as some magazine where anything is possible as long as it's somehow related to openSUSE. The recent trouble roots from the name: "news" sounds like it's the distro-official stuff while "magazine" or something similar shows it's more wide scope.
So that's something we should discuss.
Should we come up with some basic standards to put in the README.md on https://github.com/openSUSE/news-o-o?
Yes, resulting from the above topic.
What are the thoughts about this?
Should we bring this topic up to opensuse-project@opensuse.org?
Would be okay for me but not necessary.
I tend to agree that there are two separate things here and personally I think it would be better to keep them separated. When I last used my rss reader regularly I liked the fact that news.o.o just provided news so I put it at a higher priority then lizards.o.o I think we also need to be careful because news posts also show up on opensuse.org under "News". So if anything I think that we should consider lizards.o.o or similar as a magazine type thing with anything related to openSUSE. Given that not everyone has a blog etc, maybe an alternative could be that posts in the "News" category go onto news.opensuse.org and to the news section of opensuse.org, then all posts go to a new magazine.opensuse.org I think there are some people such as myself that may get annoyed if news.o.o ends up with too many posts because then the actual news gets buried in everything else and the signal to noise ratio of things I care about to things I don't gets too low. But that's just my opinion maybe others have different opinions and we should put a couple of options to project. Cheers -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B
On 9/3/20 12:31 PM, Simon Lees wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 2. September 2020, 11:25:52 CEST schrieb ddemaio:
Part of the intention to moving to the new format on news.o.o was to get more contributions and also move aware from https://lizards.opensuse.org/
Are we as a project and marketing ok with people posting info on news.o.o. as long as it's community related? I always recognized news-o-o as some magazine where anything is possible as long as it's somehow related to openSUSE. The recent trouble roots from the name: "news" sounds like it's the distro-official stuff while "magazine" or something similar shows it's more wide scope.
So that's something we should discuss.
Should we come up with some basic standards to put in the README.md on https://github.com/openSUSE/news-o-o? Yes, resulting from the above topic.
What are the thoughts about this?
Should we bring this topic up to opensuse-project@opensuse.org? Would be okay for me but not necessary. I tend to agree that there are two separate things here and personally I
On 9/2/20 11:42 PM, Vinzenz Vietzke wrote: think it would be better to keep them separated. When I last used my rss reader regularly I liked the fact that news.o.o just provided news so I put it at a higher priority then lizards.o.o I think we also need to be careful because news posts also show up on opensuse.org under "News".
So if anything I think that we should consider lizards.o.o or similar as a magazine type thing with anything related to openSUSE. Given that not everyone has a blog etc, maybe an alternative could be that posts in the "News" category go onto news.opensuse.org and to the news section of opensuse.org, then all posts go to a new magazine.opensuse.org
Would it be feasible to do the same setup as https://github.com/openSUSE/news-o-o and make it a new blog area. Maybe blog.opensuse.org rather than magazine.opensuse.org. Of course, we have https://planet.opensuse.org, which just connects blogs.
I think there are some people such as myself that may get annoyed if news.o.o ends up with too many posts because then the actual news gets buried in everything else and the signal to noise ratio of things I care about to things I don't gets too low.
That was the concern I heard from most people.
But that's just my opinion maybe others have different opinions and we should put a couple of options to project.
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-marketing+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-marketing+owner@opensuse.org
Hello, Am Donnerstag, 3. September 2020, 14:06:29 CEST schrieb ddemaio:
On 9/3/20 12:31 PM, Simon Lees wrote:
On 9/2/20 11:42 PM, Vinzenz Vietzke wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 2. September 2020, 11:25:52 CEST schrieb ddemaio:
Part of the intention to moving to the new format on news.o.o was to get more contributions and also move aware from https://lizards.opensuse.org/
For the records: lizards.o.o was a wordpress where we (technically MF- IT) hosted the blogs of several people [1] - and each individual feed (not: "alll of lizards.o.o") was aggregated on planet.o.o. Maybe planet.o.o even missed a few of the lizards.o.o blogs, I never checked that. With several free blog hosting services available (for example *.wordpress.com, github pages, ...) the decision was to ask the people who used lizards.o.o to move to another platform, and to put lizards.o.o into read-only / archive mode. lizards.o.o and news.o.o had as many things in common as someuser.wordpress.com and news.o.o: none.
Are we as a project and marketing ok with people posting info on news.o.o. as long as it's community related?
I always recognized news-o-o as some magazine where anything is possible as long as it's somehow related to openSUSE.
That sounds more like how I would describe planet.o.o. (Mostly - on planet.o.o we also get some off-topic posts from community members, and that's fine.) Playing devil's advocate on your "somehow related to openSUSE" definition: I recently asked one of the upstream AppArmor devs to adjust some library paths in the Ubuntu Chromium profile so that they match the openSUSE paths. According to your definition, that's "related to openSUSE", so - should I write an article on news.o.o about it? ;-) (No, I don't plan to write such an article, and even think that this is too minor for my own blog/planet.o.o - but I hope this example helps to understand where I see the problem.) ...
Would it be feasible to do the same setup as https://github.com/openSUSE/news-o-o and make it a new blog area. Maybe blog.opensuse.org rather than magazine.opensuse.org. Of course, we have https://planet.opensuse.org, which just connects blogs.
Exactly, we have planet.o.o. And, see above, we decided not to provide a blog platform for individual users anymore because hosting a blog somewhere[tm] is very easy.
I think there are some people such as myself that may get annoyed if news.o.o ends up with too many posts because then the actual news gets buried in everything else and the signal to noise ratio of things I care about to things I don't gets too low.
+1 Also, articles featuring a specific package also feel off-topic for news.o.o [2] - in the recent case, I'd have expected the post in someone's blog and then on planet.o.o. Independent of the question in which repo this package lives. Regards, Christian Boltz [1] For completeness: The YaST team also used lizards.o.o as blog platform (and now blogs on yast.o.o) [2] Of course, there might be exceptions - for example providing a new desktop environment might be important enough for news.o.o. -- I absolutely demand the right to shoot myself in the foot! ;-) [Stefan Seyfried in opensuse-factory] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-marketing+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-marketing+owner@opensuse.org
Am Donnerstag, 3. September 2020, 21:41:47 CEST schrieb Christian Boltz:
Hello,
Are we as a project and marketing ok with people posting info on news.o.o. as long as it's community related?
I always recognized news-o-o as some magazine where anything is possible as long as it's somehow related to openSUSE.
That sounds more like how I would describe planet.o.o. (Mostly - on planet.o.o we also get some off-topic posts from community members, and that's fine.)
No. There's a fundamental difference: curation, or the level of it. On planet- o-o I get content written by members. Most of the time it's openSUSE related in a very loose way. Just if someone's constantly and totally off topic their content gets removed. On a magazine there are a few people getting content into a curation queue like via email or pull request for their reviewing. Plus these people try actively to generate content to the page. [1]
Playing devil's advocate on your "somehow related to openSUSE" definition:
I recently asked one of the upstream AppArmor devs to adjust some library paths in the Ubuntu Chromium profile so that they match the openSUSE paths.
According to your definition, that's "related to openSUSE", so - should I write an article on news.o.o about it? ;-)
(No, I don't plan to write such an article, and even think that this is too minor for my own blog/planet.o.o - but I hope this example helps to understand where I see the problem.)
See above and following: news-o-o has no clear definition what it is. If it's strictly "news from the openSUSE project" like in press releases then we need to have a separate place for stuff like a report from a release party. If it's not but more like an overall magazine then we need to make sure the huge news don't get buried.
...
Would it be feasible to do the same setup as https://github.com/openSUSE/news-o-o and make it a new blog area. Maybe blog.opensuse.org rather than magazine.opensuse.org. Of course, we have https://planet.opensuse.org, which just connects blogs.
Exactly, we have planet.o.o.
And, see above, we decided not to provide a blog platform for individual users anymore because hosting a blog somewhere[tm] is very easy.
Yes and no. We don't need to provide a technical platform for individuals as in wordpress.com et al. Instead we should provide a platform for community content that's not individual and off-topic enough for leaving it at planet-o- o.
I think there are some people such as myself that may get annoyed if news.o.o ends up with too many posts because then the actual news gets buried in everything else and the signal to noise ratio of things I care about to things I don't gets too low.
+1
Also, articles featuring a specific package also feel off-topic for news.o.o [2] - in the recent case, I'd have expected the post in someone's blog and then on planet.o.o. Independent of the question in which repo this package lives.
Again: missing definition of news-o-o. I might repeat myself, but the way Fedora is doing it is just great. Good content, balanced between community news, announcements and tutorials. Cheers, vinz. [1] https://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-marketing/2020-01/msg00003.html [2] https://fedoramagazine.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-marketing+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-marketing+owner@opensuse.org
On 9/4/20 12:05 AM, Vinzenz Vietzke wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 3. September 2020, 21:41:47 CEST schrieb Christian Boltz:
Hello,
Are we as a project and marketing ok with people posting info on news.o.o. as long as it's community related? I always recognized news-o-o as some magazine where anything is possible as long as it's somehow related to openSUSE. That sounds more like how I would describe planet.o.o. (Mostly - on planet.o.o we also get some off-topic posts from community members, and that's fine.) No. There's a fundamental difference: curation, or the level of it. On planet- o-o I get content written by members. Most of the time it's openSUSE related in a very loose way. Just if someone's constantly and totally off topic their content gets removed.
On a magazine there are a few people getting content into a curation queue like via email or pull request for their reviewing. Plus these people try actively to generate content to the page. [1]
Playing devil's advocate on your "somehow related to openSUSE" definition:
I recently asked one of the upstream AppArmor devs to adjust some library paths in the Ubuntu Chromium profile so that they match the openSUSE paths.
According to your definition, that's "related to openSUSE", so - should I write an article on news.o.o about it? ;-)
(No, I don't plan to write such an article, and even think that this is too minor for my own blog/planet.o.o - but I hope this example helps to understand where I see the problem.)
See above and following: news-o-o has no clear definition what it is. If it's strictly "news from the openSUSE project" like in press releases then we need to have a separate place for stuff like a report from a release party. If it's not but more like an overall magazine then we need to make sure the huge news don't get buried.
...
Would it be feasible to do the same setup as https://github.com/openSUSE/news-o-o and make it a new blog area. Maybe blog.opensuse.org rather than magazine.opensuse.org. Of course, we have https://planet.opensuse.org, which just connects blogs. Exactly, we have planet.o.o.
And, see above, we decided not to provide a blog platform for individual users anymore because hosting a blog somewhere[tm] is very easy. Yes and no. We don't need to provide a technical platform for individuals as in wordpress.com et al. Instead we should provide a platform for community content that's not individual and off-topic enough for leaving it at planet-o- o.
I think there are some people such as myself that may get annoyed if news.o.o ends up with too many posts because then the actual news gets buried in everything else and the signal to noise ratio of things I care about to things I don't gets too low. +1
Also, articles featuring a specific package also feel off-topic for news.o.o [2] - in the recent case, I'd have expected the post in someone's blog and then on planet.o.o. Independent of the question in which repo this package lives. Again: missing definition of news-o-o.
I might repeat myself, but the way Fedora is doing it is just great. Good content, balanced between community news, announcements and tutorials.
I looked at the Matomo out of curiosity to see the interest these type of articles generate. Both this and the previous one appear to generate a lot more interest than normal, so I believe we should offer some option here. Maybe having articles featuring content like this isn't exactly what some project members want, but the numbers don't lie. Building something new could work, but the existing structure is set up and brings in new readers to news.o.o., which might bring in new followers on social media, etc. I'm in favor of content like this posted on news.o.o. I know some aren't in favor of this and I don't agree with them on this topic. As long as there is a clear set of rules in the README.md and the author meets the criteria, I don't see a problem with it. The Criteria (meet two of the five rules) Criteria 1 - Author must provide a call to action for the community. I.E. - Asking for community help. Criteria 2 - Article is meant to increase awareness of a package/s with the intent to make it apart of the official repositories. Advertising home repositories is discouraged and may be subject to removal of the article. Any packages linked to home projects need to include a disclaimer regarding the absence of security as the packages are currently not official and have not gone through the legal and quality assurance processes. Criteria 3 - Article informs readers of the efforts of an open-source project/s and how they relate explicitly to the openSUSE Project, its community and users. Criteria 4 - Is an official package in the distribution, an official openSUSE distribution or a project within the openSUSE Project. Criteria 5 - Provides a "how to use" or "tutorial" about on an official package within the openSUSE distribution. Thoughts? v/r Doug -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-marketing+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-marketing+owner@opensuse.org
Hello, Am Freitag, 4. September 2020, 12:19:30 CEST schrieb ddemaio:
On 9/4/20 12:05 AM, Vinzenz Vietzke wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 3. September 2020, 21:41:47 schrieb Christian Boltz: ...
I always recognized news-o-o as some magazine where anything is possible as long as it's somehow related to openSUSE.
That sounds more like how I would describe planet.o.o. (Mostly - on planet.o.o we also get some off-topic posts from community members, and that's fine.)
No. There's a fundamental difference: curation, or the level of it.
Well, I haven't seen too much curation on news.o.o, but that might be because not too many people submitted non-news articles so far.
On planet- o-o I get content written by members. Most of the time it's openSUSE related in a very loose way.
That might depend on your definition of "openSUSE related" and "loose", but in general - yes, I know that planet.o.o doesn't have a strict content policy (for good reasons).
On a magazine there are a few people getting content into a curation queue like via email or pull request for their reviewing. Plus these people try actively to generate content to the page. [1]
Yeah, I know the definition of a magazine. However, I don't see news.o.o as one ;-) [...]
news-o-o has no clear definition what it is. If it's strictly "news from the openSUSE project" like in press releases then we need to have a separate place for stuff like a report from a release party. If it's not but more like an overall magazine then we need to make sure the huge news don't get buried.
If you look at the existing content on news.o.o, then I'd say it's about "news from the openSUSE project" - but not as strict as in "only press releases" (for example, articles about release parties are also news). OTOH I don't remember articles featuring a specific package (besides the two in the last months). And yes, AFAIK we don't have a formal definition of news.o.o written down somewhere, that's why I'm describing it based on the existing content. We've used it in this way since years, so - reality wins ;-) As a sidenote - we also don't have formal definitions and policies in several other areas, and nevertheless, things usually "just work"[tm] :-) ...
Also, articles featuring a specific package also feel off-topic for news.o.o [2] - in the recent case, I'd have expected the post in someone's blog and then on planet.o.o. Independent of the question in which repo this package lives.
Again: missing definition of news-o-o.
I might repeat myself, but the way Fedora is doing it is just great. Good content, balanced between community news, announcements and tutorials.
I just had a look at fedoramagazine.org - it's good as a magazine, but I don't think that it fits the definition of "news". We have other places for texts and howtos about specific packages, with the wikis being the best ones IMHO. We already have some pages about specific applications (in the main namespace), and we also have the SDB namespace which might fit better for "how to do $task with $program". "Advertising" these articles is an open question, but I'm sure there are ways to make them visible.
I looked at the Matomo out of curiosity to see the interest these type of articles generate. Both this and the previous one appear to generate a lot more interest than normal, so I believe we should offer some option here.
Can you please define "more interest than normal"? Which articles did you look at for comparison? And what is "a lot more"? (Maybe you can provide the numbers for the last 10 or 20 articles?)
Maybe having articles featuring content like this isn't exactly what some project members want, but the numbers don't lie.
Hehe, you know the saying "don't trust statistics you didn't fake yourself?" ;-) For example, I'd guess that Matomo misses all the people who read news.o.o via feedreader or via planet.o.o. And I'd also _guess_ that this target group might find magazine-style articles less interesting.
Building something new could work, but the existing structure is set up and brings in new readers to news.o.o., which might bring in new followers on social media, etc. I'm in favor of content like this posted on news.o.o. I know some aren't in favor of this and I don't agree with them on this topic.
Indeed, this is clearly a controversial topic.
As long as there is a clear set of rules in the README.md and the author meets the criteria, I don't see a problem with it.
The Criteria (meet two of the five rules)
Criteria 1 - Author must provide a call to action for the community. I.E. - Asking for community help.
Criteria 2 - Article is meant to increase awareness of a package/s with the intent to make it apart of the official repositories. Advertising home repositories is discouraged and may be subject to removal of the article. Any packages linked to home projects need to
s/removal of/not accepting/
include a disclaimer regarding the absence of security as the packages are currently not official and have not gone through the legal and quality assurance processes.
I don't think Criteria 2 is a good idea - if someone needs help to get a package in shape for the official distribution, the development mailinglists (usually factory, unless we have a specific ML for that area) are a much better place, and have a more fitting audience. Also, MLs make it much easier to answer a call for help. The same more or less also applies to Criteria 1, but it might depend a bit on what the call for action asks for. And regarding the disclaimer about home repo security - we'll get articles that say "look, we are presenting this great package - but don't install it because it's in a completely insecure repo". Am I the only one who thinks that this will give a bad public impression of (at least) the overall article?
Criteria 3 - Article informs readers of the efforts of an open-source project/s and how they relate explicitly to the openSUSE Project, its community and users.
Criteria 4 - Is an official package in the distribution, an official openSUSE distribution or a project within the openSUSE Project.
Criteria 5 - Provides a "how to use" or "tutorial" about on an official package within the openSUSE distribution.
With the requirement to meet two of these five rules, I can imagine several ways you wouldn't like to get quite useless articles to news.o.o ;-) I'll simply dig out the example I already posted some days ago: I recently asked one of the upstream AppArmor devs to adjust some library paths in the Ubuntu Chromium profile so that they match the openSUSE paths. This clearly meets criteria 3 and 4, and would therefore qualify for a news article ;-) And I could easily make it also match Criteria 1 by adding "Please test the Chromium AppArmor profile and report any issues you find." I hope this explains why the Criterias need some ;-) improvement. To sum it up: - I'm not a fan of turning news.o.o into a magazine - If you really want to do that, please ask a wider audience for their opinion, for example on opensuse-project - The Criteria will need quite some improvements to make them troll-proof ;-) Regards, Christian Boltz -- The users sending twice are much more nasty. I guess you will not find a firmware update for them [Eberhard Moenkeberg in opensuse] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-marketing+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-marketing+owner@opensuse.org
On 9/6/20 8:02 PM, Christian Boltz wrote:
Hello,
Am Freitag, 4. September 2020, 12:19:30 CEST schrieb ddemaio:
On 9/4/20 12:05 AM, Vinzenz Vietzke wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 3. September 2020, 21:41:47 schrieb Christian Boltz: ...
> I always recognized news-o-o as some magazine where anything is > possible as long as it's somehow related to openSUSE. That sounds more like how I would describe planet.o.o. (Mostly - on planet.o.o we also get some off-topic posts from community members, and that's fine.) No. There's a fundamental difference: curation, or the level of it. Well, I haven't seen too much curation on news.o.o, but that might be because not too many people submitted non-news articles so far.
On planet- o-o I get content written by members. Most of the time it's openSUSE related in a very loose way. That might depend on your definition of "openSUSE related" and "loose", but in general - yes, I know that planet.o.o doesn't have a strict content policy (for good reasons).
On a magazine there are a few people getting content into a curation queue like via email or pull request for their reviewing. Plus these people try actively to generate content to the page. [1] Yeah, I know the definition of a magazine. However, I don't see news.o.o as one ;-)
[...]
news-o-o has no clear definition what it is. If it's strictly "news from the openSUSE project" like in press releases then we need to have a separate place for stuff like a report from a release party. If it's not but more like an overall magazine then we need to make sure the huge news don't get buried. If you look at the existing content on news.o.o, then I'd say it's about "news from the openSUSE project" - but not as strict as in "only press releases" (for example, articles about release parties are also news).
OTOH I don't remember articles featuring a specific package (besides the two in the last months).
And yes, AFAIK we don't have a formal definition of news.o.o written down somewhere, that's why I'm describing it based on the existing content. We've used it in this way since years, so - reality wins ;-)
As a sidenote - we also don't have formal definitions and policies in several other areas, and nevertheless, things usually "just work"[tm] :-)
...
Also, articles featuring a specific package also feel off-topic for news.o.o [2] - in the recent case, I'd have expected the post in someone's blog and then on planet.o.o. Independent of the question in which repo this package lives. Again: missing definition of news-o-o.
I might repeat myself, but the way Fedora is doing it is just great. Good content, balanced between community news, announcements and tutorials. I just had a look at fedoramagazine.org - it's good as a magazine, but I don't think that it fits the definition of "news".
We have other places for texts and howtos about specific packages, with the wikis being the best ones IMHO. We already have some pages about specific applications (in the main namespace), and we also have the SDB namespace which might fit better for "how to do $task with $program". "Advertising" these articles is an open question, but I'm sure there are ways to make them visible.
I looked at the Matomo out of curiosity to see the interest these type of articles generate. Both this and the previous one appear to generate a lot more interest than normal, so I believe we should offer some option here. Can you please define "more interest than normal"? Which articles did you look at for comparison? And what is "a lot more"? (Maybe you can provide the numbers for the last 10 or 20 articles?) It is rather difficult to compare because of the time line of the releases, but taking the numbers from July 1 period, you'll see: Rise of TW - 600 Ritchie-CLI - 734(revert caused a problem and there are two) Alpha Jump - 1084 TW Apache Wireshark, etc - 1000 oSLO Talks Accepted - 297 Partiicpate in Hacktoberfest - 367 TW Kernel 5.8 - 493 Prototype brings Leap, SLE Closer - 684 TW GCC 10.2 - 367 Leap Retro - 445 Install Party - 338 oneAPI Compatibility - 810
Maybe having articles featuring content like this isn't exactly what some project members want, but the numbers don't lie. Hehe, you know the saying "don't trust statistics you didn't fake yourself?" ;-)
For example, I'd guess that Matomo misses all the people who read news.o.o via feedreader or via planet.o.o. And I'd also _guess_ that this target group might find magazine-style articles less interesting.
Building something new could work, but the existing structure is set up and brings in new readers to news.o.o., which might bring in new followers on social media, etc. I'm in favor of content like this posted on news.o.o. I know some aren't in favor of this and I don't agree with them on this topic. Indeed, this is clearly a controversial topic.
As long as there is a clear set of rules in the README.md and the author meets the criteria, I don't see a problem with it.
The Criteria (meet two of the five rules)
Criteria 1 - Author must provide a call to action for the community. I.E. - Asking for community help.
Criteria 2 - Article is meant to increase awareness of a package/s with the intent to make it apart of the official repositories. Advertising home repositories is discouraged and may be subject to removal of the article. Any packages linked to home projects need to s/removal of/not accepting/
include a disclaimer regarding the absence of security as the packages are currently not official and have not gone through the legal and quality assurance processes. I don't think Criteria 2 is a good idea - if someone needs help to get a package in shape for the official distribution, the development mailinglists (usually factory, unless we have a specific ML for that area) are a much better place, and have a more fitting audience. Also, MLs make it much easier to answer a call for help.
The same more or less also applies to Criteria 1, but it might depend a bit on what the call for action asks for.
And regarding the disclaimer about home repo security - we'll get articles that say "look, we are presenting this great package - but don't install it because it's in a completely insecure repo". Am I the only one who thinks that this will give a bad public impression of (at least) the overall article?
I felt somewhat similar about a disclaimer, but disclaimers do serve a purpose.
Criteria 3 - Article informs readers of the efforts of an open-source project/s and how they relate explicitly to the openSUSE Project, its community and users.
Criteria 4 - Is an official package in the distribution, an official openSUSE distribution or a project within the openSUSE Project.
Criteria 5 - Provides a "how to use" or "tutorial" about on an official package within the openSUSE distribution. With the requirement to meet two of these five rules, I can imagine several ways you wouldn't like to get quite useless articles to news.o.o ;-)
I'll simply dig out the example I already posted some days ago:
I recently asked one of the upstream AppArmor devs to adjust some library paths in the Ubuntu Chromium profile so that they match the openSUSE paths.
This clearly meets criteria 3 and 4, and would therefore qualify for a news article ;-) And I could easily make it also match Criteria 1 by adding "Please test the Chromium AppArmor profile and report any issues you find."
I hope this explains why the Criterias need some ;-) improvement.
To sum it up: - I'm not a fan of turning news.o.o into a magazine - If you really want to do that, please ask a wider audience for their opinion, for example on opensuse-project - The Criteria will need quite some improvements to make them troll-proof ;-)
Seeing that this doesn't appear to be going down a path for criteria, how about we switch it and express it that if your article would meet criteria 1, 2, etc, we recommend to use another avenue (i.e. - mailing lists, planet, others) rather than use news.o.o. Criteria 3 and 5 could be considered acceptable for news.o.o. v/r Doug -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-marketing+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-marketing+owner@opensuse.org
Hello, Am Montag, 7. September 2020, 10:57:28 CEST schrieb ddemaio: > On 9/6/20 8:02 PM, Christian Boltz wrote: > > Am Freitag, 4. September 2020, 12:19:30 CEST schrieb ddemaio: > >> On 9/4/20 12:05 AM, Vinzenz Vietzke wrote: > >>> Am Donnerstag, 3. September 2020 schrieb Christian Boltz: ... > >> I looked at the Matomo out of curiosity to see the interest these > >> type of articles generate. Both this and the previous one appear > >> to generate a lot more interest than normal, so I believe we > >> should offer some option here. > > > > Can you please define "more interest than normal"? Which articles > > did > > you look at for comparison? And what is "a lot more"? > > (Maybe you can provide the numbers for the last 10 or 20 articles?) > > It is rather difficult to compare because of the time line of the > releases, but taking the numbers from July 1 period, you'll see: > Rise of TW - 600 > Ritchie-CLI - 734(revert caused a problem and there are two) > Alpha Jump - 1084 > TW Apache Wireshark, etc - 1000 > oSLO Talks Accepted - 297 > Partiicpate in Hacktoberfest - 367 > TW Kernel 5.8 - 493 > Prototype brings Leap, SLE Closer - 684 > TW GCC 10.2 - 367 > Leap Retro - 445 > Install Party - 338 > oneAPI Compatibility - 810 I'd have expected higher numbers for all articles, but that might be caused by people reading news.o.o via RSS or planet.o.o, and also by people with ad and tracking blockers or "do not track" set in the browser. All of these things make mamato "blind". And - to add another guess - maybe the numbers for oneAPI and Ritchie- CLI were more caused by "huh, never heard that name, what's this and why is it on news.o.o?" than by people who might actually be interested in them. At least for me, I can tell you that it was like that - I never heard about them before, and will probably never use them. (Actually I have to admit that I already forgot what they do.) But as I already said: > > Hehe, you know the saying "don't trust statistics you didn't fake > > yourself?" ;-) ;-) ... > > And regarding the disclaimer about home repo security - we'll get > > articles that say "look, we are presenting this great package - but > > don't install it because it's in a completely insecure repo". > > Am I the only one who thinks that this will give a bad public > > impression of (at least) the overall article? > > I felt somewhat similar about a disclaimer, but disclaimers do serve a > purpose. Well, yes. But then - shouldn't that simply mean that an article which needs such a disclaimer is not suitable for news.o.o? > >> Criteria 3 - Article informs readers of the efforts of an > >> open-source > >> project/s and how they relate explicitly to the openSUSE Project, > >> its > >> community and users. > >> > >> Criteria 4 - Is an official package in the distribution, an > >> official > >> openSUSE distribution or a project within the openSUSE Project. > >> > >> Criteria 5 - Provides a "how to use" or "tutorial" about on an > >> official package within the openSUSE distribution. ... > > To sum it up: > > - I'm not a fan of turning news.o.o into a magazine > > - If you really want to do that, please ask a wider audience for > > their opinion, for example on opensuse-project > > - The Criteria will need quite some improvements to make them > > troll-proof ;-) > > Seeing that this doesn't appear to be going down a path for criteria, > how about we switch it and express it that if your article would meet > criteria 1, 2, etc, we recommend to use another avenue (i.e. - mailing > lists, planet, others) rather than use news.o.o. Agreed. (BTW: Which criteria did you mean with "etc"?) > Criteria 3 and 5 could be considered acceptable for news.o.o. I still don't like this idea, for the reasons explained in my previous mails. And if you still really want to turn news.o.o into a magazine, I'd recommend to make Criteria 4 a hard condition. Regards, Christian Boltz -- randomlink against caching is now murphyproof. [Ratti in fontlinge-cvs] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-marketing+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-marketing+owner@opensuse.org
> Well, yes. > > But then - shouldn't that simply mean that an article which needs such a > disclaimer is not suitable for news.o.o? > >>>> Criteria 3 - Article informs readers of the efforts of an >>>> open-source >>>> project/s and how they relate explicitly to the openSUSE Project, >>>> its >>>> community and users. >>>> >>>> Criteria 4 - Is an official package in the distribution, an >>>> official >>>> openSUSE distribution or a project within the openSUSE Project. >>>> >>>> Criteria 5 - Provides a "how to use" or "tutorial" about on an >>>> official package within the openSUSE distribution. > ... >>> To sum it up: >>> - I'm not a fan of turning news.o.o into a magazine >>> - If you really want to do that, please ask a wider audience for >>> their opinion, for example on opensuse-project >>> - The Criteria will need quite some improvements to make them >>> troll-proof ;-) >> Seeing that this doesn't appear to be going down a path for criteria, >> how about we switch it and express it that if your article would meet >> criteria 1, 2, etc, we recommend to use another avenue (i.e. - mailing >> lists, planet, others) rather than use news.o.o. > Agreed. > (BTW: Which criteria did you mean with "etc"?) Just meant to list the criteria is all. Nothing more meant about etc other than listing them all. > >> Criteria 3 and 5 could be considered acceptable for news.o.o. > I still don't like this idea, for the reasons explained in my previous > mails. > > And if you still really want to turn news.o.o into a magazine, I'd > recommend to make Criteria 4 a hard condition. So this is probably what we could list in the read me file. news.opensuse.org is meant for the publishing of official news about the openSUSE Project and it distributions. Only articles about official packages in the distribution should be published. Articles written to increase awareness of a package and the advertising of home repositories is discouraged and may be subject to the removal of the article. We advise that information that fits the following circumstances be published on the author's blogs, on an email list or other appropriate communication channel and not published on news.opensuse.org: Information about a call to action for the community Information about an open-source project, its community and users "How to use" or "tutorials" about packages (official or unofficial) v/r Doug > > > Regards, > > Christian Boltz -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-marketing+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-marketing+owner@opensuse.org
participants (4)
-
Christian Boltz -
ddemaio -
Simon Lees -
Vinzenz Vietzke