On 05/02/2011 21:55, Jason D. Clinton wrote: > On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 13:43, Maciej Piechotka <uzytkownik2 gmail com> wrote: >> While it might be a stretch analogy but some people argue in various >> companies (not every company and it may be argued how good the policy >> is) to open the discussion/design process to community (I think I heard >> about Dell, Starbucks and others). Of course it is company who plays the >> role of beneficial dictator in this model nonetheless the consumers may >> be proven to be valuable source of feedback and ideas (even if the need >> to be filtered out). > > You characterized the situation with the power manager as a "crisis" "crisis" was meant to be hyperbolic. > and yet, while your description is more than a little hyperbolic, that > situation demonstrates that precisely what you are asking for is not > productive. There is slight difference between "documenting" result, "documenting" rationale and "documenting" process. > There were a total of four blog posts on the topic and > approximately 200 comments posted to those. There wasn't any negative > feedback on any of those four post's comments that was well researched > or particularly informed about all the issues that need to be > considered. Even people who tried to offer alternatives didn't seem > particularly informed about common use cases or what other operating > systems are doing (all research that had previously been done by the > design team). There was some legitimate concerns expressed, > particularly about why the research shows that AC and on-battery are > the same situation, but that was a tiny minority of the feedback and > not surprisingly, a large majority of this informed discussion > happened on IRC in #gnome-os and #fedora-desktop--not on a mailing > list or blog. > <FLAME>Then show <del>your<del><ins>design team</ins> work! All I'm hearing is that research have been done and the issue have been taken into consideration during disussion but I DON'T have any references. I cannot see logs of IRC (at least google is not showing them), blogs does not disclose why the decision was made in such way exactly and why the broken workflows are bad. All I'm hearing is that I'm uninformed. The decision presented on blog is presented as final final - not as a strong proposal (even if technically it is the same there are slight differences in PR). I'm not specialist in UI design - but I cannot even get response to information why my workflow is bad and how did you invision it (say - large backups during night).</FLAME> Basically - it seems that many people have feeling that their needs are being ignored in name of Average Joe and they are asked to leave. I'm *not* saying that the design team have not done their job - but they seems to fail in communicating their rationale to some power users who feel angry. Sure - I might have done research on topic. I might start reading papers or even ask about them on #gnome-shell. I might have been rational But I guess that the discussion would be much less heated if the references were given - humans are not always rational. I proposed the change to have a shift from 180x"Your design ***" to even 10x"Have you considered XYZ?" -> "Yes - read paper ABC" or even just include reference to ABC (give future historians when GNOME will rule the world some sources ;) ). Regards PS. To sum up - I think that community thinks that decision are made with practically closed doors (not everybody can even observe the discussion due to time constraints) and the results are posted as final truths as community is considered too stupid to understand (I'm NOT saying it is true - I'm saying it is the FEELING). It may be even more PR problem then technical one but I believe it is important one anyway. Contrast it with even Linux kernel where Linus is benevolent dictator and while some decisions may be considered controversial there is some discussion in public and loggable media.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part