Sorry if I am not
answering in an orderly fashion today, I don´t have much time.
Please, see my comments in line:
Daniel
Katie Capps Parlante wrote:
Expanding on the "what is
the goal or vision?" question a bit...
Restating the themes as specific goals:
(1) Get real users, as soon as possible
- real users will give us valuable feedback and keep us from
wandering in the dark forever
- real users will help us create a community sooner
+1
(2) Get to "plausible" on
integrated-pim features
- gives us more time/releases to iterate design ideas before 1.0
- excites people about chandler being more than a calendar, makes
the
ideas concrete
- may interest more people to contribute sooner if we are plausible
in more areas
- helps flush out the infrastructure, sooner, giving us more time to
have a chance to get this right for 1.0
+1
BTW, the term "plausible"
comes from The Cathedral and the Bazzar:
> When you start community-building, what you need to be able to
> present is a plausible promise. Your program doesn't have to work
> particularly well. It can be crude, buggy, incomplete, and poorly
> documented. What it must not fail to do is convince potential
> co-developers that it can be evolved into something really neat in
> the foreseeable future.
I believe something
must be rock solid, like calendar. But one thing at least.
This is also the main reason why I also think it´s important a fast
response (not sure if merging dev version with en users will penalty on
this (I have been reading the dev list though not commenting).
And also to be able to startup more than once Chandler in the same
session at least in winXP without having to kill a process (not for the
average user).
This are things that I (subjectively) believe might put off an average
user (even power user) and the idea I believe is getting momentum.
When we think of goal (1)
we tend to lean towards more calendar and sharing features, because
we've gotten a lot of feedback that there is a strong need out there
for calendaring. 0.6 was all about this goal, but perhaps we can see
that continued work will be needed to get/keep calendar users.
The actual ones (i
believe) are not calendar users, they are Chandler users. We have been
calendar users since Mimi (from what I recall) suggested to start
dogfooding calendar features.
+1 for Mimi
For goal (2) some basic
task management workflows seem like a good fit imho. A modest
investment in email, the table, the content model, and the dashboard
might be enough to paint a concrete picture to capture people's
interest and get the ball rolling.
+10
For either goal, we could
choose workflows that span different areas of the app, as Mimi pointed
out.
Could we tackle both goals in one long release? Would it help if we set
reasonable standards for "plausibility"? Can we pick calendar workflows
that are relatively inexpensive?
No long releases,
small concrete steps (short periods, shorter than 6 months)
How would this fit with 2 shorter releases? Would we pick one goal for
each release? Would we make partial progress towards each goal in each
release?
One could explicitly state the goal:
(3) Build a bigger community as soon as possible
Seems to me that one could argue about whether (1) or (2) above would
be more helpful.
Cheers,
Katie
Sheila Mooney wrote:
Daniel,
We are still working out the high-level goals for 0.7 but 2 themes are
emerging....
-> Continued sharing and calendar work in order to get more users.
This means responding to dogfooding feedback and implementing new
features such a the ability to view free-busy information for a group
of people.
-> Make significant progress on some of the non calendar areas of
the app, particularly around dashboard and email. It's important to
start work on this now to make sure the architecture supports more than
just the calendar. Also, getting started on this earlier allows us more
time to iterate on the designs for the dashboard and task management.
Since we imagine this to be part of the 1.0 product, there are some
concerns about putting this off any longer.
We are certainly open to other possibilities for the 0.7 goals/vision
but these are the 2 that seem to be dominating the discussions so far.
Sheila
On Nov 30, 2005, at 1:58 PM, Daniel Vareika wrote:
Sheila:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
|
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
