I'm completely and utterly against this idea, you might push away the noise, but you are pushing away all new contributors as well... how are you supposed to become a design contributor if you're not a programmer and you cannot contribute designs because you cannot join the mailing list since you can't become a foundation member?
Maybe we should think about moderating the design mailing list in a smarter way... or maybe we should have a more formal design proposal process (some sort of wiki section/template or something) and ask people to write down and discuss their crazy proposals there instead of the mailing list, I'm sure there are better ideas in this regard.
Asking people to become contributors (and then foundation members) first so that they can contribute seems like a really bad idea to me.
--2012/5/2 Sriram Ramkrishna <sri ramkrishna me>
On Apr 25, 2012 8:43 AM, "Allan Day" <allanpday gmail com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 9:55 AM, John Stowers
> <john stowers lists gmail com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> So there are lots of ways that we can do design better as a community,
> >> and contributors on this list can all play a part in helping to make
> >> us to be even more successful in this regard. It will take actions as
> >> well as words to move forward, of course - if you want to help, or
> >> have your own ideas, just get in touch.
> >
> > Many of your suggestions seem designed to address or avoid conflict, or
> > to convey design team decisions in a better manner. This is not the
> > source of my confusion nor my uncertainty in how to interact with the
> > design team.
> >
> > In order to piece together the rationale or even the process for design
> > team decisions I currently browse commit logs on the gnome-design github
> > repo, and look at comments made when changing live.gnome.org pages. Some
> > of you tweet stuff, others scatter it on google+. You suggest even using
> > $some_new_webapp to better collaborate on designs.
> >
> > While I cannot see the discussion and the evolution of design team
> > thought (even if I have the time to piece together all these sources of
> > information) all I see is a decision by decree when a live.gnome.org
> > page is created which describes the final design.
> >
> > My suggestion is thus the same as it was the last time this thread was
> > raised - if the design team does not want to archive discussions on a
> > mailing list, may they please allow IRC logging on the gnome-design
> > channel.
>
> I'm not sure how useful logging the channel will be (lots of noise,
> etc), but I'd be happy to give it a go. The main thing is that we
> shouldn't stop there. IRC logs aren't going to fix the whole gamut of
> challenges that we face in relation to community design.
>
> > You can even be proactive and send email updates to ddl or
> > something.What about a mailing list of which only foundation members can subscribe to? I made this suggestion earlier.
Sri
>
> I've lapsed in my design update blog posts, but I've got a new one in
> the works. You think emails would be better than blogging?
>u
> > Of course if the canonical way to interact with the design is to show up
> > on IRC at a specific hour then, IMO, you will lose contributors. I can
> > hack any time of night when I have the motivation and the free time. But
> > if I want to understand why the design team did something I have to...
> > trust them?
> >
>
> Trust them, or ask them, or a combination of the two. (Trust comes
> best once you gain experience of working with people, of course.)
>
> Allan
> --
> IRC: aday on irc.gnome.org
> Blog: http://afaikblog.wordpress.com/
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-devel-list mailing list
> desktop-devel-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
_______________________________________________
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Cheers,
Alberto Ruiz