summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/news/2011-q2-ps.mdwn
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorThomas Schwinge <tschwinge@gnu.org>2011-09-01 09:27:33 +0200
committerThomas Schwinge <tschwinge@gnu.org>2011-09-01 09:27:33 +0200
commit3e7472b3d54853389cd8a17475901fbef976ef18 (patch)
treefdd31020d36728fe3c2059fa93a9dfcf7b2c2e87 /news/2011-q2-ps.mdwn
parent688fc9d79713c183c0b7ff2bc1717525c773bee9 (diff)
IRC.
Diffstat (limited to 'news/2011-q2-ps.mdwn')
-rw-r--r--news/2011-q2-ps.mdwn33
1 files changed, 33 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/news/2011-q2-ps.mdwn b/news/2011-q2-ps.mdwn
index cbf039b0..14578e83 100644
--- a/news/2011-q2-ps.mdwn
+++ b/news/2011-q2-ps.mdwn
@@ -95,4 +95,37 @@ slashdot
and phoronix did some [performance tests of the Hurd][phorperf],
[phorperf]: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=debian_gnu_hurd&num=1
+---
+
+IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-08-24:
+
+ < ArneBab> hurd related: I now think you were right, antrik: the hurd
+ rumors don’t belong into the news (tschwinge)
+ < antrik> ArneBab: you mean the postscriptum as a whole, or just the wild
+ rumours part?...
+ < ArneBab> the whole PS
+ < ArneBab> it should rather go into a blog post
+ < ArneBab> (in the wiki)
+ < antrik> hm... I don't think I agree
+ < ArneBab> why?
+ < antrik> apparently there is a number of people following the news now,
+ and apparently many of them misread some statements... it makes sense to
+ use the same channel for clarifying them I'd say
+ < ArneBab> hm, ok
+ < ArneBab> how would you select the part to include?
+ < antrik> roughly speaking, I'd include everything that actually relates to
+ the previous news that were misunderstood
+ < antrik> and drop all unrelated speculations that popped up
+ < antrik> BTW, it *might* be useful perhaps to actually update the original
+ news posting with the clarifications?...
+ < ArneBab> we can’t do that without breaking some peoples RSS feeds
+ < antrik> note that there is another aspect to consider: the fact that
+ several news sites picked it up is indeed genuine news by itself...
+ < ArneBab> that’s right, yes
+ < antrik> will it really break anything? from what I heard so far it just
+ means they will see the posting as new again, which would actually make
+ sense in this case...
+ < antrik> but I don't insist if you think it's too risky :-)
+ < antrik> just an idea
+
-->