Re: GNOME Roadmap Draft

["Lucas Rocha" <lucasr gnome org>]

Hi,

2007/5/22, Vincent Untz <vuntz gnome org>:
> Le lundi 21 mai 2007, à 23:25 +0300, Lucas Rocha a écrit :
> > Hi all,
> >
> > As promised, the roadmap draft for 2.20, 2.22 and future releases is
> > available at:
> >
> >   http://live.gnome.org/RoadMap/Draft
> >
> > Proof-readers wanted. So, what I propose is that we polish the draft a
> > litle bit (until this wednesday, May 23) and move it to the official
> > location (http://live.gnome.org/RoadMap). Then, we make a call for
> > feedback on d-d-l and heat up discussion on major topics for future
> > releases there.
>
> Looks really great.

Thanks!

> I'd add a section "Modules that could be integrated in the near future".
> It's not easy, since as Lucas points out, we don't want to create hope
> for a module while it's not sure it'll get in. But that's still
> interesting to know, I believe. Maybe ask people who are interested in
> proposing a module for GNOME to let us know?

I think could add a section like "Proposed modules". I think it's
implicit that there's no garantee they will be actually integrated.

> Also, as I said on IRC, I'd prefer to first mail d-d-l with the draft
> URL and ask people to not discuss the content but verify there's no
> error. Then we move the content to RoadMap and start the feedback part
> of the process.

Ok. I'm mailing d-d-l now. I defined a deadline for feedback: friday (May 25).

> > - I divided the roadmap into "For Users", "For Developers", "For
> > Admins" and "For Everyone". I think in the roadmap context, this works
> > better than "User-visible", "Platform" and " Infrastructure &
> > Organization". For example, sometimes a change is not user-visible but
> > they alter the user experience. Comments?
>
> Maybe it's worth putting a small paragraph at the beginning explaining
> this. My first reaction was "this deskbar change is not for users", but
> I then realized it could change the user experience. So a small
> paragraph could help.

Done.

> > - I explicitly pointed the goals which will be implemented by SoC
> > projects to motivate the current students and the future ones. :-)
>
> Good :-)
>
> > - We need to heat up discussion about some of the topics triaged
> > inside "Proposed GNOME-wide/Platform goals". Those discussions must
> > take place in an organized way in d-d-l. We could create separate
> > theads for each topic.
>
> That's really important to have separate threads. It helps a lot.
>
> > IMHO, the focus of discussion should be to
> > point out when we want to/can deliver certain results and what's
> > missing/needed to achieve such goals. My favorite topics include:
> >  * Desktop bug reporting (Many people complaining about those)
>
> Is there really something to discuss here? Maybe we should just ask Fer
> and Olav to explain their plans to improve things.

Fer is just 5 meters from me now. I'll ask him about those questions. :-)

> >  * Metadata and desktop search (Hot topic. Choose a desktop engine? Just
> >        use XESAM standard API? Where can it be integrated in the Desktop? When?)
> >  * Session management (When can the new gnome-session be released? What
> >        needs to be changed in applications? Gnome Goal for this?)
>
> This would be asking for Dan what are his current plans wrt session
> management.

Ok.

> >  * File system access (Probably released on 2.20, most likely in 2.22. GVFS
> >        application migration task-force when it's ready?
> >  * Documentation (Mallard is coming. What needs to changed in manuals,
> >        user-guides, docs, etc? Gnome Goal for this? New doc editor.)
> >  * Evolution Data Server and messaging (Pick an "official" messenger? How can
> >        presence/messaging be more integrated in the Desktop? Simplified API
> >        for e-d-s?)
> > Comments? Suggestions?
>
> That's interesting to bring all those topics on d-d-l for discussion,
> but we need to make sure that the discussion is constructive and does
> not become a huge useless thread.

That's the real chalenge! :-P

--lucasr