couchdb-marketing mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jan Lehnardt <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [REQUEST] Promote the CouchDB 1.6.0 release
Date Thu, 12 Jun 2014 19:12:58 GMT
Another angle on all this:

For 1.2.0 we prepared longer release notes that not only listed the items relevant to the
release, but also explained what they meant. There is a balance to strike between phrasing
it so it is useful vs. not breaking it down for absolute noobs. Someone who follows CouchDB
a little bit should understand them. I understand that’s more work, but this is the stuff
that ends up being quoted, cited and copied nearly verbatim. The more content and context
we can provide, the better our coverage is. I don’t think we should go full press-release,
but it is also worth mentioning what each release means in a larger context. E.g. 1.6.0 is
a feature release that addresses a number of user requests and also bug fixes that we think
is worth releasing before the big CouchDB 2.0 / BigCouch merge is done.

Is this something this group can take on?

Best
Jan
--


On 11 Jun 2014, at 21:54 , Andy Wenk <andy@nms.de> wrote:

> jumping in to the discussion ...
> 
> On 11 June 2014 21:49, Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org> wrote:
> 
>> On 11 June 2014 19:50, Alexander Shorin <kxepal@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Another good example how to share release news (sorry for google
>> translate):
>>> 
>> https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.opennet.ru%2Fopennews%2Fart.shtml%3Fnum%3D39981
>>> In single post you get quick knowledge about CouchDB: what is it, how
>>> it works, where it uses, and sure what's in release. And it doesn't
>>> matter what user will read this post: experienced will just skip the
>>> header and read the changes list, the new /  potential user will meet
>>> with the project and may get interested in it.
>> 
>> This is a whole blog post. And we've already written a whole blog post
>> about the release. It's on our blog. ;)
>> 
> 
> yes!
> 
> 
>> What bothers me is the duplication. We've already written about it
>> once! Just click and read it there.
> 
> 
>> Would it be unusual to post the blog text in full to Google+? Do
>> people really expect you to summarise blog posts when you share them
>> on Google+?
>> 
> 
> I don't think so. I think people expect a quick summary to scan if the
> content of the posted link is interesting to read or not. I personally do
> not read longer posts on G+. But what I like is a summary and I think this
> is what Alex is proposing ...
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Andy
> 
> 
>> 
>> --
>> Noah Slater
>> https://twitter.com/nslater
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Andy Wenk
> Hamburg - Germany
> RockIt!
> 
> http://www.couchdb-buch.de
> http://www.pg-praxisbuch.de
> 
> GPG fingerprint: C044 8322 9E12 1483 4FEC 9452 B65D 6BE3 9ED3 9588
> 
> https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/andywenk.asc


Mime
View raw message