#162 btrfs Fedora Magazine article
Closed: Fixed a year ago by chrismurphy. Opened a year ago by aday.

Public relations is an important part of the btrfs feature initiative - to succeed we need to convince both the Fedora community and the wider world that it's a good idea. To do that we need to put our own story forward as to why this is a good decision, as well as address concerns that people might have.

A good first step would be to have a Fedora magazine article about btrfs. This needs to happen sooner rather than later - the longer we leave it, the more likely people are to come to their own conclusions about btrfs.


Did you say that you were working on this, @ngompa ?

Either myself or @chrismurphy, but yeah, I can do it.

Thanks. When you have a draft, please post it here so the WG can review it.

We should probably prominently discuss how btrfs protects users from bitrot.

Metadata Update from @ngompa:
- Issue assigned to ngompa

a year ago

FYI there's an existing discussion about a Fedora Magazine article at https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/btrfs-maintneance/21695/8
and an article proposal ticket at
https://pagure.io/fedora-magazine-proposals/issue/98

Discussed this with @chrismurphy briefly and he'd like to do this. As he's a better wordsmith than I, I'm happily handing this to his capable hands! :sweat_smile:

Metadata Update from @ngompa:
- Issue assigned to chrismurphy (was: ngompa)

a year ago

I'd definitely like WG opinions on the scope and structure of these articles, and also the sequence of them. It might seem ambitious to consider 1/2 dozen articles out of the gate, but that actually makes it way easier to write individual articles because it narrows the scope of each one by a ton. Also, these quickly get into the realm of PR, and managing expectations. The first few articles will be setting a lot of that, so I think they should be factual yet delicate, encouraging but respectful of people's preferred file system of choice.

A longer spitballing comment, by me, in that issue is here.

The question raised in the proposed article is not one I'd recommend for a first article. It might be useful in letting folks know that such regular rituals aren't needed by them, and what optimizations will happen - once we're settled on them.

I'd definitely like WG opinions on the scope and structure of these articles, and also the sequence of them. It might seem ambitious to consider 1/2 dozen articles out of the gate

Obvious topics to cover -

  • a general introduction to btrfs (its history, key concepts, how it differs from other file systems/block layers)
  • why btrfs for Workstation
  • address common concerns (isn't it fragile, won't I lose data, etc)
  • what's happening as part of the change process (testing, integration, documentation, etc)

When we do messaging, I think it's important not to say that btrfs is definitely happening no matter what. It is a feature that is in development, which is targeting F33, and which will only be included if it passes our validation criteria.

Metadata Update from @chrismurphy:
- Issue untagged with: btrfs

a year ago

Metadata Update from @chrismurphy:
- Issue tagged with: btrfs

a year ago

OK there is a draft, and this is the preview --> PDF

I have no preference where comments go. Here in the WG pagure issue. Or IRC. Or email. There is also the Fedora Magazine discourse issue specifically for this proposed article (series).
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/btrfs-by-default/22020

Metadata Update from @chrismurphy:
- Issue tagged with: meeting

a year ago

OK there is a draft, and this is the preview.
https://fedoramagazine.org/?p=31615&preview=true

That's a 404 page. Copy/paste it here please. ;)

New article organized and drafted by @langdon , "smooshed" and edited by @bcotton, polish by @catanzaro and @chrismurphy.

Expired link

Metadata Update from @chrismurphy:
- Issue untagged with: meeting

a year ago

New article organized and drafted by @langdon , "smooshed" and edited by @bcotton, polish by @catanzaro and @chrismurphy.

https://fedoramagazine.org/?p=31659&preview=1&_ppp=0bb55b7252

"This link has expired!". Chris, can you please provide a new link?

Expired link

OK it's being editing now, and will tentatively be published Monday.

The paragraph on compression needs adjustment. There are too many moving parts in Fedora to make this change inside a week. I've created #177 for this and tagged with F34 milestone.

Options for the article's compression paragraph:

  1. Remove, don't replace it.
  2. Replace it with... some other feature.
  3. Keep it in, but move it into the "What's next?" section, and rework. e.g. say we’re looking forward to leveraging it by default in Fedora 34.

@bcotton

I think adding a "What's next?" section for upcoming enhancements makes sense if this is an overview introduction of the change itself.

  1. Keep it in, but move it into the "What's next?" section, and rework. e.g. say we’re looking forward to leveraging it by default in Fedora 34.

I like this option the best.

OK that has been done. Scheduled to publish Monday at 0800 UTC.

https://fedoramagazine.org/?p=31659&preview=1&_ppp=0356ac0460

The article went live on Monday.
https://fedoramagazine.org/btrfs-coming-to-fedora-33/#comments

There are now 87 comments, about 1/4 are my replies. Overall it's positive and inquisitive. There are few criticisms of appealing to Facebook and (open)SUSE as authorities; and general concerns and misconceptions that could be useful to not directly answer with replies, but an ask and answer style 2nd Fedora Magazine article or a community blog.

What's next?

OK closing this. If anyone wants to discuss more articles, please reopen and tag for meeting-request.

Metadata Update from @chrismurphy:
- Issue close_status updated to: Fixed
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)

a year ago

Login to comment on this ticket.

Metadata
Boards 1
Btrfs Status: Done