On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 10:17, Juergen Harms <[email protected]> wrote: > [...]
That's an excellent point that indeed, complements teams, for cross-displinary works and experiments. > Some embroidery around how such working parties might work: > - their principal aim should be to work out concepts / proposals that > improve the end-user value of Mageia; > - their work should be complementary to what the established Mageia > structures do (Mageia teams, the cooker-follow-up, etc); > - they should be self-organised (off-load work from the established > structures; in one extreme using a private mailing list for communication, > in the other extreme use a temporarily maintained sub-forum) > - they should work under the umbrella of Mageia (the work should in relation > to topics raised in Mageia mailing lists and forums, Mageia should be kept > informed; Mageia might formulate some general guidelines to be respected in > order to accept the working party under the label of Mageia). So that would be coordinated by/reported to the Mageia Council then. There needs to be some sort of formal designation (to know who is working with whom and on what) as well as progress/final reporting and archives of discussions or results. But that's something to iron out of practice. Would be good/obvious for Mageia.org to provide tools for that, but indeed, letting these groups experiment with unused, outside tools is a good opportunity as well. As for the "Install from Windows" thing, that could be a start, but (these are general points anyway): - before, or while building this work group, you have to assess the value of having an Linux installer from Windows; that is, goal is not to make a "me too" installer; goal is to understand why/if there needs to be a Linux installer from Windows in the first place and if there is a user-benefit of having one on the large scale and in the user flow (that is, as several pointed out in the thread, isn't this more like a "fast" answer to a problem that has not been thought deeply enough?) => in short, what problem does this solve? is it really the problem? is it really a good solution? - for instance, is it to fully replace the system? dual boot? user to decide? will the user be properly reassured about the process, her data and really understand what is going to happen? - note that this is not to discourage, it's to test the idea; moreover, there can be other benefits from working on a Windows-based Linux installer (if ever): knowledge, inter-systems operatins, doc, skills; - volunteers should spec this (a short one will do), what they expect to demonstrate as a proof-of-concept (working program, user flow project), build the work group (for instance here, will likely need a Windows system developer at least), focus and then go ahead. Romain
