20:05:36 <suehle> #startmeeting
20:05:36 <zodbot> Meeting started Fri Nov 30 20:05:36 2012 UTC.  The chair is suehle. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
20:05:36 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
20:05:45 <suehle> #meetingname Fedora Weekly News
20:05:45 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_weekly_news'
20:05:53 <suehle> #topic roll call
20:05:59 <iambryan> nm, here we go
20:06:07 <suehle> iambryan, suehle, bcotton, jbrooks, quaid . done. :)
20:06:18 <suehle> #topic Where we've been
20:06:35 <suehle> Does somebody with a better knowledge of the history want to discuss what worked and what doesn't?
20:06:49 <suehle> Maybe most specifically, why publication has dropped off precipitously
20:07:04 <jbrooks> I think the key is losing the main editor
20:07:08 <jbrooks> Pascal
20:07:22 <jbrooks> That's my impression
20:07:38 <suehle> And he said he's glad to help us transition to plan B
20:08:09 <jbrooks> Yep, so we need a new point person -- I'm happy to do it, but happy to help a point person, as well
20:08:25 <suehle> Are any of you involved in INsight? It's something I keep hearing about but nobody ever says, "Yeah, I'm doing that." Is it just dead?
20:08:33 <suehle> wow, you summoned pcalarco :)
20:08:37 <jbrooks> :0
20:08:42 <jbrooks> :) I mean
20:08:59 <pcalarco> Hi folks -- I am on a telephone conference but also thought I should try to be available :)
20:09:07 <iambryan> I have only seen insight, but it had come up in past discussions with the admin side
20:09:20 <suehle> pcalarco, Maybe you're the best one to give us a rundown of suggestions on what works, what doesn't, and what you think would be the best approach here
20:09:22 <jbrooks> I've heard of insight, but that's it
20:09:28 <suehle> Is it just a matter of someone needing to take the reins?
20:09:55 * suehle is starting to think Insight is a Fedora rickroll people throw into conversation to distract you. "Oh yeah, Insight does that."
20:09:57 <iambryan> from the insight page it looks more loke a planet feed
20:10:08 <iambryan> suehle: possible :P
20:10:31 <pcalarco> It essentially just needs regular leadership to produce the issue
20:10:55 <suehle> pcalarco, Do you have an SOP about how you generally source the content and so on?
20:10:55 <pcalarco> we also need to get more regular writers to commit to producing content
20:11:07 <suehle> #action Need FWN contributors
20:11:14 <suehle> Maybe that was more of an info.
20:11:20 <pcalarco> yes, http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FWN
20:11:23 <suehle> An info that needs action. :D
20:11:25 <iambryan> beyond that I think we need to coordinate with mktg
20:12:06 <pcalarco> as far as I know, Peter Borsa continues to work on the technical end, although with Paul Frields and sometimes a few others
20:12:08 <fran_m> suehle: what kind of action?
20:12:22 <fran_m> technical action?
20:12:31 <suehle> fran_m, zodbot takes meeting minutes and lets us tag things with #action or #info
20:13:11 <pcalarco> further development of the Drupal modules needed for Insight
20:13:14 <pcalarco> and theming
20:13:18 <iambryan> I am willing to commit some time with jbrooks to help bring fwn up on a regular basis
20:13:24 <suehle> OK, so maybe if jbrooks and I take editorial charge (maybe trading off alternating weeks), reinvigorate the beat writers and perhaps find some new ones, we should be on a good path?
20:13:32 <pcalarco> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Insight
20:13:36 <suehle> and iambryan. Triple editorship sounds awesome. :)
20:13:42 <jbrooks> Sounds good to me
20:13:48 <suehle> #link http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FWN/Beats
20:13:52 <suehle> #link  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Insight
20:14:01 <pcalarco> thx, sry :)
20:14:22 <suehle> Not at all, I think it was good to just get together and do that quick brain dump.
20:14:31 <suehle> Even if the ultimate answer is pretty easy. :)
20:14:35 <jbrooks> :)
20:14:53 <jbrooks> Once we have content flowing again, we can start to look at presentation, etc.
20:14:55 <pcalarco> I am willing to take on a beat, just don't have time anymore to edit
20:15:18 <iambryan> I think we may wat to broaden the "beat" perspective though
20:15:28 <suehle> #action jbrooks, iambryan, suehle to take turns as weekly editors
20:15:38 <suehle> iambryan, go on...
20:15:41 <suehle> pcalarco, any particular beat?
20:15:41 <jbrooks> iambryan, what do you have in mind?
20:16:05 <iambryan> i think that may be part of the issue, it may prevent som people from taking on as the topics narrow
20:16:43 <iambryan> say maybe take top 5 updates, dev, etc
20:16:57 <iambryan> more magazine style
20:16:58 <pcalarco> I could do security updates
20:17:22 <bcotton> before we get too into beats... who's our target audience? contributors? the media? users?
20:17:31 <iambryan> my opinion is to try and make it friendly to all potential writes and users
20:17:31 <jbrooks> The thing I like about the beat setup is it lets writers pay attn to a particular thing
20:17:40 <bcotton> (i like iambryan's idea of doing it magazine style)
20:18:05 <suehle> #info pcalarco would do security beat
20:18:20 <bcotton> the other advantage of magazine is we can lengthen the release cycle, which gives us mroe content per issue
20:18:43 <suehle> Define "magazine style" when we're talking about an email.
20:18:52 <jbrooks> I think before we think about releases, we need material to release
20:18:53 <iambryan> jbrooks: we can share beats per say
20:19:21 <jbrooks> iambryan, Oh, I see, so only one person per beat makes it seem too daunting to take on?
20:19:26 <fran_m> maybe you are too much focused on tech
20:19:35 <jbrooks> I think making big areas shareable is a good idea
20:19:42 <pcalarco> it doesn't necessarily have to be an email anymore tho; could just be a Drupal site that people go to and/or gets pulled from
20:19:48 <iambryan> so lets make a plan to a) develop some quick "get started" content and then look at the delivery method
20:19:55 <bcotton> suehle: if i understand iambryan, it's less newsy and more in-depth. profiles of contributors, a column from rbergeon, etc
20:20:01 <suehle> pcalarco, I think that was the concept of turning FWN to Insight, but that would require Insight to be a moving train
20:20:11 <bcotton> so it's not so much about the presentation format as the content
20:20:47 <suehle> I think that's more of a blog/web magazine if you want to call it that, which I'm not opposed to, but then maybe FWN is the weekly newsletter roundup that comes out of that.
20:21:00 <suehle> It may be harder to get longer-form contributors though.
20:21:21 <iambryan> blog contributions?
20:21:37 <bcotton> suehle: it may, but it's probably easier to get more content in that manner. weekly beats seems like a lot of time investment unless tehre are multiple well-coordinated contributors
20:21:46 <iambryan> say like a moderated planet?
20:21:52 <pcalarco> yes +1
20:21:54 <jbrooks> Well, yes -- there's a planet beat
20:22:04 <jbrooks> which is one of the more interesting beats, when it happens
20:22:09 <pcalarco> the Planet beat was very time intensive
20:22:10 <iambryan> I mean for contributed content
20:22:20 <jbrooks> That might be a good one to share
20:22:43 <suehle> OK, here's a suggestion then:
20:22:51 <iambryan> bcotton: could be a good way to intro users to docs ;)
20:23:25 <suehle> Insight seems essentially abandoned. We reclaim it and start a) producing content for it, which may be long, magazine-style pieces or may be short updates like you'd have seen in an FWN email and b) aggregate some content hand-picked from Planet
20:23:43 <iambryan> +1
20:23:55 <bcotton> suehle: +1
20:23:57 <suehle> Then FWN becomes a weekly "Insight Highlights" email in case people don't do the blog thing and would rather get the email.
20:24:54 <pcalarco> one way to make FWN easier for content contributors might be to consider producing content less frequently, like bi-weekly instead of weekly
20:25:39 <jbrooks> I like the idea of posting to a site on a rolling basis, and sending out weekly updates from that
20:25:46 <suehle> pcalarco, going to the Insight blog-style makes it more of small content daily than bulk content weekly, which should help with that
20:25:59 <pcalarco> sounds good
20:26:00 <jbrooks> It's a different model for the editors
20:26:31 <jbrooks> Perhaps easier, though the long form pieces bit is a bit undefined
20:26:55 <suehle> jbrooks, I just mean that then there's a place for such content if/when we have people willing to produce it, which with the old FWN there's not
20:27:11 <iambryan> part of that can be excerpted from planet and other related
20:27:12 <suehle> I don't think I'm up to saying we need 3 in-depth interviews a month or anything :)
20:27:21 <jbrooks> There actually was -- you put your beats on the wiki, and they do or don't get sent out
20:27:28 <suehle> Also, there's the beginnings of a video interview series with contributors, which could be posted there, so there's some content
20:27:29 <jbrooks> The editor was a bottleneck
20:27:41 <jbrooks> I wrote several In the News beats that never got sent out
20:28:08 <jbrooks> I think that sort of thing had a bad effect on contributors
20:28:20 <suehle> Insight appears to work on a moderator queue, which means with three people with editorial powers, low bottleneck
20:28:21 <jbrooks> Having it roll, writing into the blog would help that issue
20:28:22 <iambryan> so, if we spread out the editorship we shouldn't get bottlenecked
20:28:23 <pcalarco> yeah that's when I started getting swamped and couldn't put the time in
20:28:35 <jbrooks> Yes, I like it
20:29:21 <iambryan> ok, so how do we go about reclaiming insight?
20:29:25 <suehle> OK, so if nobody objects then, I'll email marketing and logistics (which appears to be the list for Insight) and see if anybody stands up and says, "No I was working on stuff for Insiiiiight!" which seems unlikely
20:30:21 * quaid arrives back in, reads buffer, and thinks folks have a fair grasp of the current situation
20:30:22 <pcalarco> +1
20:30:31 <suehle> There was an insight meeting in Blacksburg that was Justin O'Brien, Robyn, and Jared Smith. I'm not foreseeing a lot of angry objection.
20:31:02 <suehle> And Robyn is largely the one who keeps saying "blergh blergh Insight blergh" when I mention news content, so I think we're facing the right direction. :)
20:31:03 <quaid> +1 to claiming Insight, that's been it's purpose from the start - to recapture some of what FWN was before it got folded in to Fedora, a destination with growing useful content
20:31:50 <quaid> FWN way-back-then was also known for being a source for technical how-to articles, cf. Red Hat Magazine of 6 years ago
20:32:17 <suehle> And given how many people have begged me to bring back RHM, I think there's an audience out there if we can get that content happening.
20:32:31 <iambryan> I am all for it
20:32:36 <jbrooks> great
20:32:36 <quaid> and +1 to the daunting-overwhelming-feeling that one can get from trying to maintain a beat all-by-yourself
20:32:58 <iambryan> quaid: lol
20:32:58 <quaid> beat teams, for example, might work well - I'd personally thrive much better in such situations
20:32:58 <suehle> And if anybody needs a motivator to write that content, RHM was always the #1 hit-getter on all of redhat.com for just that content.
20:33:16 <bcotton> will FWN be upstream for RHM? ;-)
20:33:20 <suehle> #info make beats groups rather than individuals
20:33:26 <suehle> bcotton, RHM hasn't existed in about four years
20:33:30 <pcalarco> I was also in Blacksburg as well as tatica
20:33:32 <quaid> suehle: it's possible that kind of content will expand rapidly (blow up), as people LOVE to write how-to content to fire and forget :)
20:33:43 <suehle> pcalarco, sorry--I was just going by the minutes on the wiki
20:34:00 <quaid> bcotton: HA!
20:34:07 <suehle> #info Encourage technical content
20:34:09 <iambryan> quaid: agreed, 70% of thiings i've written were for that reason
20:35:34 <suehle> Any further comment, questions, or objection?
20:35:37 <quaid> #idea Cultivate content that appears on Fedora Planet to be republished via Insight/FWN - look for timel and useful articles, get permission to reprint
20:35:53 <quaid> I think that was sort-of said before, but I wanted to nail it down as more cultivate than
20:35:57 <quaid> "dump Planet here'
20:36:43 <bcotton> quaid: agreed, though I'd like to see the content appear on Insight before planet
20:36:57 <pcalarco> I would suggest trying to get at least two people working on Planet content; its a lot of work
20:37:00 <bcotton> at least in some cases
20:37:50 <quaid> bcotton: I bet that happens over time
20:38:08 <suehle> I think at least two for all the beats would be ideal
20:38:08 <iambryan> agreed, maybe we can get some flares out on planet asking for first run long articles?
20:38:13 <quaid> #idea 2+ people to work on Planet content cultivation & beat
20:38:38 <quaid> #idea 2+ people to work on all beats (i.e., teams)
20:39:19 <iambryan> shall we get this chan added permanently?
20:39:43 <suehle> iambryan, that was on my to-do list to figure out, although perhaps now #fedora-insight would be more appropriate
20:40:01 <iambryan> suehle: good thinking
20:40:16 * iambryan adjusts my near-sighted lenses
20:40:17 <suehle> #action suehle to permanent-ify #fedora-insight
20:42:33 * Sparks has completely forgotten what the base software was going to be for Insight
20:42:57 <iambryan> Sparks: was mentioned here as drupal
20:43:09 <suehle> drupal, yes
20:43:12 <pcalarco> drupal 7
20:43:42 <Sparks> Ahh, Drupal!  I remember trying to package that.
20:44:51 <suehle> I assume all of you want to be beat writers? :)
20:45:52 <Sparks> Wait, we get to beat the writers?
20:46:07 <suehle> Well, yes, and since you're a writer...
20:46:32 <iambryan> yet another perk to the job :P
20:46:49 <suehle> OK, I get the sense we're wrapped up here. :)
20:46:52 <suehle> #endmeeting