In my experience, one-man efforts (such as this one to provide handwritten reports) are very difficult to sustain over a long period of time. After a while, it becomes hard to keep up, so what starts as a by-weekly report becomes monthly and then quarterly... The problem with this approach is that as the reports become more spread apart, the information becomes old and therefore less newsworthy.
Despite checking the website frequently for the past 3 months, I haven't looked into my Haiku email folders. I've actually got very little idea of what has happened in that time.
So you might consider my forthcoming 3 month update less newsworthy than "Stephan made ProxyAudioSupplier compile again today" but I'm sure for many Haiku-watchers it will prove more interesting.
Looking at the sample feed that Waldemar provided here (please, do take a look)...
...the annotated feed can provide as much depth of information as a handwritten summary, and it does so in a very timely manner. Given that generating the annotated feed would require less effort and that it actually can be done by multiple people in collaboration, I think this is a smarter and potentially much more sustainable way to push up to date info on what's happening in the development of Haiku from a central point.
If people are willing to subscribe to a feed that seems a good one to go for. People who just check the website once every now and again might feel it's yet another thing they can't keep up with lots of regular small updates on.
I think the collaboration aspect of Waldemar's proposal is also very important. We are a very generous community and thus good at contributing (as recently proven by the HCD08 donatio drive). But IMO we lack a bit in the collaboration department (myself included, btw). Waldemar has come up with good way to participate and collaborate; let's try to give it a shot. :)
Perhaps. I'm sceptical how much collaboration would happen, but maybe update posts are always destined to be this way - someone takes up the job, runs with it for a little while and then drops the ball for a bit and someone else takes over with a slightly different approach.
The annotated commit approach may miss the times when there are lots of small commits that add up to a big amount of work on something that lacks the headline-grabbing commit, but maybe that's a reasonable price to pay for the reduction in effort it would bring. We can but try :)
If a proper shared framework is set up maybe there will be additional contributors. An annotated feed also could provide the slightly less overwhelming "raw material" for more infrequent update posts such as the ones I've been trying to write.
Good luck with it anyway. Simon