On Wednesday, 19 December 2012 at 21:58:12 UTC, foobar wrote:
Personally, I think the whole pre-development stage needs to
get looks at -
Specifically having some sort of at least high-level *binding*
planning - road map, mile stones, todo lists. This should give
more weight to DIPs.
DIPs at the moment have no weight whatsoever. The attributes
showed all the major flows in the decision making process:
1. Feature idea comes up in discussion.
2. Feature was discussed heavily by the community reaching some
design consensus.
3. Plan is abandoned/forgotten due to Walter's objections - not
to the design but the idea itself.
4. Feature comes up again in discussion, thus returning to
point 1 above in infinite loop.
A big fix is in order there too, it's actually what should be
fixed first but from what I've seen going on in here if we can
get something even basic implemented for the development and
releases that will be a *huge* step forward. Once we have some
kind of formalized process in place and prove to everyone how
much better things are because of it, it'll be a first by the
looks of things, and from that experience the other big holes
will become easier to pick out and deal with.
I think we have to keep it simple for now, focus on a dev,
staging, release process, implement something, work out the bugs,
get people used to having it, and prove the value, then we can
get on with tackling the other major issues in a similar way.
There's lots of room for improvement ahead, but we need to make
at least one significant step forward in a successful way before
we can hope to move on to the next one.
--rt
