I would like to avoid having the Project Discussion area full of functional posts that aren’t really discussion. For those, we have the Team Workflows category — or more exactly, subcategories within that for each separate workflow. See the Fedora Magazine workflow category for a comparable example.
In fact, one possibility (if both teams agree) could be to use the existing category (possibly under a slightly different name), with #magazine and #community-blog tags to distinguish. (Folks who only care for or the other could mute the one they don’t need to see.) But it would also be easy for me to make a separate new category.
In addition to keeping Project Discussion for human thoughts rather than process, this would also let us lower search priority (both for the internal site search and via hints to external search engines). This site has high search engine rankings generally, so without this there’s a risk of people finding meta-process posts-about-posts before the actual final article.
Maybe, but the stakeholders involved with each workflow are different. Is there a particularly good reason not to have multiple tags for different teams? I’m trying to understand the incentive for fifteen different things in one category.
The PgM Team seems better aligned since @bcotton / FPgM owns it as editor-in-chief.
I’ve created Community Blog Review. Right now, there is a magazine-editors group which additionally has moderation access to Fedora Magazine. What is the equivalent for this group? (This permissions difference is a reasonable-enough one to have a separate category under the explanation in my last reply — if it matters.)
which probably should be renamed to #magazine-review or something, but that’s a different topic! ↩︎