Re: Listening to user base

Il giorno lun, 27/06/2011 alle 09.34 -0400, Matthias Clasen ha scritto:
> On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 6:32 PM, Giovanni Campagna
> <scampa giovanni gmail com> wrote:
> [...]
> Hey Giovanni,
> this email is really too long to answer. Queuing dozens of
> unanswerable questions doesn't make the whole any more answerable...

I know, it was very long, but I didn't expect a full point-by-point
reply. Just a global answer that the problems are acknowledged and
something is being done.

> Just a few points:
> - Going from 2.x to 3.0 is really not comparable to going from 2.28 to
> 2.30 or from 2.30 to 2.32. Why do you even compare these ? It is very
> much to be expected that some people are upset and uncomfortable with
> the amount of new and changed things in 3.0; after all, this was the
> first major overhaul of the desktop in ~10 years.

I've been following only since 2.28, so that's my experience, and I
expected some more noise for 3.0, but not this difference. If you say it
is normal, then probably it is, and everything's fine.

> - Saying that the release team is 'responsible for the whole community
> and making the final decisions' is putting a bit too much on our
> shoulders. We are neither the spokespeople of GNOME nor are we the
> designers of GNOME; the role of the release team is mainly to ensure
> that our release process runs smoothly. And yes, that does include
> interacting with marketing and design, but we are not the ones doing
> it all ourselves.

The release team has the technical lead, given that you decide what goes
in and what stays out, at the feature and module level. By extension, I
see that as being in charge of final decisions, in case they cannot be
made by traditional means because of dissent.
Is this wrong? If so, who is responsible?

> - But yes, we do need direction and goals for the project. Absent a
> 'strong man', the best we can do is to keep relying on the same basic
> principles that we always have: meritocracy and
> doing-wins-over-talking.

Meritocracy would be ideal, but how do you judge merit? And what if it
is merit in different fields (say, design and development)?


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]