From: jeffk@cyberspace.org (Jeff Kopmanis) Subject: LSM Administrative Discussion Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1993 04:03:50 GMT
First of all, the second release of the Linux Software Map (LSM) is running
a bit behind due to more work than I thought was there. Sorry about this.
Due to this delay, I learned some things about the way everything should
work pertaining to the LSM. I'd like to run by my conclusions with you and
will ask for constructive comments and suggestions. I'm still learning the
wonders of administration, so bear with me.
First issue: The LSM turnaround cycle.
From the initial chaos, a cycle has emerged. I will release a version of
the LSM to sunsite and tsx-11, and at the same time, will mail out work to
the volunteers. This is to ensure that everyone has current copies of
everything. There were some problems with this that still persist, mainly
with respect to different templates. Template changes will be made WITH
the LSM, so please try to utilize the most current template. I'll post in
COL and COLA when this happens.
Second issue: Keeping the LSM up to date.
A little background...
I monitor COLA regularly for new packages, announcements, etc. I save copies
of articles pertaining to new stuff for entry into the LSM at a later date.
Unfortunatly, most of these announcements do not contain enough info for an
entire LSM entry. This leaves me with alot of sifting and searching
through files for stuff to put into the LSM. The developers have been very
slow in submitting LSM entries on their own.
What I'm considering as a system...
I'm thinking about jotting down their email address from the COLA, watching
the ls-lR files on tsx-11 and sunsite for new entries, and after a period of
time, sending out empty templates to those developers who didn't send me
something. They would then fill them out and send em back. The developers
have the most intimate knowledge of the packages and would spend the least
amount of time filling them out compared to others who are not as familiar
with the package.
The central question for developers is: Would you object to getting a template
in the mail and taking a few minutes to fill in the goodies?
Keep in mind that my network resources are small and dwindling, as the
University of Michigan is going to be shutting down anonymous-FTP outside
of Merit (the state-university/college network) for non-authenticated
users. I.e. me. I'll be looking at alternate places in the coming months,
but nothing is guaranteed.
Is this a reasonable turn to take in trying to manage the large-ish load of
announcements, versus the smaller numbers of submissions?
I would ask, no, BEG, that your comments be kept constructive. Flame wars
just waste bandwidth. I know that it will be slightly inconvenient for
developers, but it has proven to be very time-consuming for someone to sort
through COLA announcement text looking for LSM fields. The LSM needs
better turnaround time, as sometimes versions have come and gone.
Thanks for your time and thoughts.
Look soon for release 2 of the LSM!
-Jeff. :)
-- =========================================================================== Jeff Kopmanis (Ann Arbor, Michigan) | email: jeffk@cyberspace.org Organizer of the Linux Software Map (LSM) | phone: (313) 393-4784 (work) ===========================================================================