All I know is that I have tried really hard to get people to help out. Sure, I have had my own life to deal with as well (Which has also be busy), so I have not always been around. But I have tried to get people to help edit / proof read. I have even posted new builds of the pdf after changes have been made. I have to say that it really feels like I have been doing most of the work myself :( This is quite de-motivating.
It would really be great if things could be turned around. With the Lucid release it really felt like we were all working as a team. With Maverick, that has just not happened. Dare I say it, but the manual project kind of feels orphaned. I hope things can change. All the best Chris On 31 October 2010 23:16, Ilya Haykinson <haykin...@gmail.com> wrote: > So in conclusion, i don't think we should release less often, we should >> just work to improve our workflow and the workflow of new contributors >> whether they be authors, editors or translators. Also i do remember that >> Ilya was around a lot during the lucid cycle sort of being an editor in >> chief, but since then we haven't had anyone doing that. >> >> > I've been keeping up with the mailing list traffic, but have been very busy > at work for the last 5 months or so -- so much so that I couldn't really > contribute to the Maverick release. I completely agree that the main thing > that is required is some small group of people who serve as the editors and > drive the process along -- making decisions on where to cut and where to > focus, etc. Obviously I couldn't spare the time for the Maverick cycle, and > am not yet sure how the Natty cycle will look for me (the first couple of > months are going to be tough for sure). > > However, I think it's critical to release every 6 months, even if the > quality isn't great. Only through frequent releases combined with small > improvements can the end product end up great -- if you take 2 years to do a > release, I think the team will fall apart. > > My recommendations are (some are the same as what others have recommended): > > - manage translations separately, and do not release the manual to > translators until after the manual is ready to go. this will yield a > smoother translator experience as the content won't be changing from under > them, and will simplify the manual itself. > - delay the manual publishing date for 3-5 weeks after each release, to > allow content and screenshots to catch up > - by beta1, have a firm list of changes to be included in the manual; a > week after release date, cut anything that hasn't been written or is > possible to get to the highest quality. > - work to improve the process. I think this is the least important item, > honestly, since core contributors will always be ok with downloading TeX and > dealing with compilation etc, and while it's key for long-term project > health to bring in casual contributors, I think that a) this is a > stand-alone process that shouldn't be mixed into shipping the manual itself, > and b) the manual comes first, well before automation or better processes. > > Thoughts? > > -ilya > > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-manual > Post to : ubuntu-manual@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-manual > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > >
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-manual Post to : ubuntu-manual@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-manual More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
