Re: [Usability]'org chart'

[Luis Villa <louie ximian com>]

On Wed, 2002-10-16 at 02:32, Seth Nickell wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-10-15 at 12:34, Luis Villa wrote:
> > As some of you may have seen discussed a few months back[1] some effort
> > is being made to create a GNOME 'org chart' that would help improve
> > GNOME's communication and lines of responsibility.
> > 
> > The relevant portion of the original doc for you guys and gals is:
> > 
> > Usability[sent]
> >  -contacts: Seth Nickell, Nils Pedersen, Calum Benson
> > responsibilities:
> > 	*maintain and publish the HIG
> > 	*review all GNOME software for HIG compliance and general usability
> > 	*provide and evangelize advice and resources for hackers and programs
> > 	*coordinate with a11y team
> 
> This list is more or less accurate, but reflects more what we have done
> in the past than what we should be doing now.

The original intent of this list (and the discussion about this list)
was not to serve as a forum for the future but to describe the current
state or to enumerate non-controversial roles for the future, so I'm
glad you feel this is mostly accurate.

> > Is this accurate? Does it describe what you guys think you should be
> > doing for GNOME? Does it describe what you think GNOME should expect
> 
> I think a critical point is missing regarding what we "should" be doing
> for GNOME. Namely, all this stuff is still primarily premised on
> usability helping clean up the inevitable trail of destruction left by
> random hacking ;-) I think that phase is gradually falling away. The
> most important function we should be performing is forward looking:
> 
>    * design the interfaces of GNOME components
> 
> A related function that we're starting to take baby steps toward is...
> 
>    * ensure the completeness and coherence of the GNOME desktop
> 
> This essentially entails looking at the usability of the desktop as a
> whole....how do pieces fit together? Do they work similarly? Are there
> important missing functions? This sort of thing.

These are very large-scale changes in the structure of GNOME which
aren't within the scope of this (extremely informal) document and
document procedure. Certainly, once the document is posted, you might
use that as a jumping off point for this type of discussion, and I
definitely expect that it will be a dynamic document that we can change
as GNOME's reality changes. These emails (this thread) just isn't the
appropriate place for that discussion to occur.

Luis