Re: IRC channels in gnome development
Hey Andy, Andy Wingo wrote: Hi Alan, FWIW I mostly like GNOME 3, so I don't want to pile on the flamefest. But this bothered me: On Sun 06 Feb 2011 15:27, Allan Day allanp...@gmail.com writes: Even if you had records of every discussion, you wouldn't get the information you're looking for. Design decisions don't get made committee meeting style, and design involves a lot of specialist background knowledge which doesn't get explicitly referenced. Fact is, we'll probably never be able to give 100% of the rationale behind design decisions. The thing is, we've done mostly well in the programming department. If the subtext is this is the case for design in contrast to programming, I would like to disagree; that would be unjust both to programming and to design. Often programming is just as solitary an affair, yet we manage to communicate in such a way that enables collaboration; surely programmers are not more socially competent than designers ;-) Likewise designers don't work alone. I'm sure you have been one of two or three or six designers sitting at a table hashing things out. In neither profession do things happen committee meeting style -- when things go well, of course! -- but there is collaboration. Sure, designers communicate and collaborate. And of course we need to make an effort to ensure that our communications are accessible to others. This characterization of design also neglects the great community design work that has been done recently by Máirín, for example, and done to an extent within GNOME. I'm not as familiar with Máirín's work as I should be. It's fair to say that experiments in community design have had mixed results, though: Papercuts is an obvious success, but the Ayatana list isn't a productive place and UX Advocates is dead. (I'm not sure how Mozilla's efforts have worked out...) Finally, it's rare that a programmer never does design work, or for a designer never to code at all. Totally agree: 'designer' and 'developer' aren't mutually exclusive categories. We all need pointers and records to figure out how things are done. Of course it's not always possible! That's what the HIG is for, though I do think we can do more to keep people abreast of new developments. But it would be an error not to hold transparency up as a goal, IMO. The question, I think, is what role we imagine transparency to perform. If it's to inform and to make the community feel that it's a part of GNOME design, then I am all for it. What I'm skeptical about is the idea of transparency for the purposes of accountability. It simply isn't true to say that we haven't made an effort to explain what we're doing. I explained many of the design considerations in my blog post [1] on this subject, and I did that precisely because I wanted to help people to be informed. For this, and all your awesome work, thank you! Thanks. :) Allan -- Blog: http://afaikblog.wordpress.com/ IRC: aday on irc.gnome.org ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
Hi, Gendre Sebastien wrote: Le samedi 05 février 2011 à 11:43 -0600, Paul Cutler a écrit : Development is not a democracy For a personal project, no. But Gnome is not your personal project, it's a community project. The light of this, you have a duty of openness to the whole community. A community project means exactly what Paul says - it is not a democracy. Your argument is one of the main fallacies circulated about free software - just because the project is free software does not mean that everyone's opinion carries equal weight. You have an array of forums for expressing your opinion, as do I, but in the end of the day, the most important opinion is the one which is expressed in code. So far I have mostly attended one-way debat with designers. Some people arrive with good arguments but they are ignored or they receive ridiculous and/or void cons-arguments. Impossible to have a good debat. I think it is important for designers to have a good productive relationship with some key developers. I think it's important for the designers to be competent, and to have the trust of the developers. And honestly, the opinion of people outside that group carry much less weight. Sure, designers developers need to avoid presenting plans products carved in marble, but what you call good arguments might not be good arguments to members of the core team of Shell. In the end of the day, changing something which is a core concept of a project probably needs a *lot* of evidence that the change would be a positive one. And for things which are accessory, there would at least need to be a decent level of agreement on a proposed alternative. Changing design should be just as hard and have just as high a bar as proposing a patch for a feature. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary GNOME Foundation member dne...@gnome.org ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On 6 February 2011 12:52, Dave Neary dne...@gnome.org wrote: Hi, Gendre Sebastien wrote: Le samedi 05 février 2011 à 11:43 -0600, Paul Cutler a écrit : Development is not a democracy For a personal project, no. But Gnome is not your personal project, it's a community project. The light of this, you have a duty of openness to the whole community. A community project means exactly what Paul says - it is not a democracy. Your argument is one of the main fallacies circulated about free software - just because the project is free software does not mean that everyone's opinion carries equal weight. You have an array of forums for expressing your opinion, as do I, but in the end of the day, the most important opinion is the one which is expressed in code. So far I have mostly attended one-way debat with designers. Some people arrive with good arguments but they are ignored or they receive ridiculous and/or void cons-arguments. Impossible to have a good debat. I think it is important for designers to have a good productive relationship with some key developers. I think it's important for the designers to be competent, and to have the trust of the developers. And honestly, the opinion of people outside that group carry much less weight. Sure, designers developers need to avoid presenting plans products carved in marble, but what you call good arguments might not be good arguments to members of the core team of Shell. In the end of the day, changing something which is a core concept of a project probably needs a *lot* of evidence that the change would be a positive one. And for things which are accessory, there would at least need to be a decent level of agreement on a proposed alternative. Changing design should be just as hard and have just as high a bar as proposing a patch for a feature. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary GNOME Foundation member dne...@gnome.org ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list Guys, for a sake of a sanity. I've been around gnome since pre 2.0 times. And all times up to now we supposed that OSS is about democratic process, where programmers are not told buy big enterprise daddy what to write. Now, you former windows/sco/ibm/sun programmers are coming and saying that is wasn't. Yes, there are some big developers who can steer the way of a project, but nobody up to now just came I said what you have just said! You can't complete your shell if you drop off all the remaining developers of the boat. Shell is already a buggy hell, that will take many months just to stabilize. Now, probably you realize that simply dumping your privately developed project on a community in hope that it will accept and maintain it doesn't work. If you want to have your shell working, just change your position on this matter. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
Hi! Guys, for a sake of a sanity. I've been around gnome since pre 2.0 times. And all times up to now we supposed that OSS is about democratic process, where programmers are not told buy big enterprise daddy what to write. Now, you former windows/sco/ibm/sun programmers are coming and saying that is wasn't. Yes, there are some big developers who can steer the way of a project, but nobody up to now just came I said what you have just said! Hmm, yes the developers code what THEY want and not what a company tells them to do. But that isn't democratic because that still doesn't mean they do what a majority or mailing list posts/non-involved people want. You can't complete your shell if you drop off all the remaining developers of the boat. Shell is already a buggy hell, that will take many months just to stabilize. Now, probably you realize that simply dumping your privately developed project on a community in hope that it will accept and maintain it doesn't work. Please don't rant, file bugs if there are things that don't work for you. Regards, Johannes ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 12:41:59AM -0800, Baybal Ni wrote: Guys, for a sake of a sanity. I've been around gnome since pre 2.0 times. And all times up to now we supposed that OSS is about democratic process, where programmers are not told buy big enterprise General attitude is that it is a meritocracy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meritocracy Or: People who do stuff decide (merits). daddy what to write. Now, you former windows/sco/ibm/sun programmers are coming and saying that is wasn't. Yes, there are some big You can do what you want. However, it is still not a democracy. Might not be accepted by a maintainer. developers who can steer the way of a project, but nobody up to now just came I said what you have just said! Search for e.g. meritocracy site:gnome.org. You can't complete your shell if you drop off all the remaining developers of the boat. Shell is already a buggy hell, that will take many months just to stabilize. Now, probably you realize that simply dumping your privately developed project on a community in hope that it will accept and maintain it doesn't work. If you read up on meritocracy you'll notice that it is decided by the people who are making it and are maintaining it. -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
Guys, for a sake of a sanity. I've been around gnome since pre 2.0 times. And all times up to now we supposed that OSS is about democratic process, where programmers are not told buy big enterprise News to me, and flagship projects like the Linux kernel run on the Linus is boss model. The freedom is more fundamental than that. Democracy and similar systems are a workaround for the fact in the physical world I can't do cp -r ourcountry mycountry mv ourcountry/me mycountry/me and continue In Free Software you can, so if a bunch of people don't like the current direction of Gnome they can get involved and change it from within, or they can take a copy with them and work in parallel, either for bits of or for all of the desktop. Freedom to make the decision doesn't extend to freedom to make other people do the work for you or listen to you and this does lead to new branches and ideas being tried out - sometimes becoming the norm (eg the egcs rebellion against gcc process became gcc 3) Alan ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 21:52 +0100, Dave Neary wrote: A community project means exactly what Paul says - it is not a democracy. Your argument is one of the main fallacies circulated about free software - just because the project is free software does not mean that everyone's opinion carries equal weight. You have an array of forums for expressing your opinion, as do I, but in the end of the day, the most important opinion is the one which is expressed in code. I am the last person to argue against a meritocracy. I'm certain that it's the only model under which Gnome can possibly exist. But this discussion stopped being about code 20 emails ago. Maintainers will inevitably have to say no sometimes. There are different ways of doing that. On the one extreme, you can just tell people they're stupid. On the other, you can carefully explain your reasoning each and every time. And there's a whole lot of gray in between. A project like Gnome lives and dies by its community. We have to find the right gray level to keep people enthusiastic about what we're doing. Judging from recent history, I don't think we've found that. -- Shaun ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
2011/2/6 Nirbheek Chauhan nirbh...@gentoo.org: On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Andreas Nilsson nisses.m...@home.se wrote: On 02/05/2011 06:25 PM, Maciej Piechotka wrote: IRC channels seems to be used in gnome development. It may be just me but I believe that recent power setting crisis show (I contrast them to mailing lists): - Requires presence. Many people cannot afford being on irc 24/7 - both developers, potential developers or just interested users. The houres of the meeting may clash with working hours or other real live constraints. Yes, IRC has it drawbacks, but it also makes discussing design a lot faster and effective than doing it on mailing lists. We need to be time effective if we're going to make the April 6th release date. Is there a place where IRC logs of discussions from the various channels can be found? This is even more needed now that closing laptop lid will cause network to be terminated by suspend, ie irc client to loose its connection and therefore logs.. -- Frederic Crozat ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 19:19 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: Is there a place where IRC logs of discussions from the various channels can be found? I am not aware of any automated GimpNet IRC channel logging and publishing. andre -- mailto:ak...@gmx.net | failed http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Andre Klapper ak...@gmx.net wrote:
On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 19:19 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
Is there a place where IRC logs of discussions from the various
channels can be found?
I am not aware of any automated GimpNet IRC channel logging and
publishing.
It would be very useful to have a bot around which logs conversations
on #gnome-{shell,design,os} et al and puts it up somewhere. A number
of GNOME channels already have bots to manage chanops, those could
probably be put to this use as well, if possible.
To cover the conversations that have already happened; maybe people
can put up their logs of these channels of the past year (or whatever
they have). We can then patch up the various logs to make a full log.
--
~Nirbheek Chauhan
Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
Hi, Shaun McCance wrote: Maintainers will inevitably have to say no sometimes. There are different ways of doing that. On the one extreme, you can just tell people they're stupid. On the other, you can carefully explain your reasoning each and every time. And there's a whole lot of gray in between. A project like Gnome lives and dies by its community. We have to find the right gray level to keep people enthusiastic about what we're doing. Judging from recent history, I don't think we've found that. Agreed. And one way to make saying no easier is to be able to point people to conversations where decisions were made. I'm not a fan of important stuff happening on IRC (even when it's logged, to be frank, reading IRC logs to find useful information is painful at the best of times). I have previously discussed with a few people the idea of a publicly archived mailing list with moderated membership for GNOME design (since usability list was considered unusable for the purpose of productive design work by several people I spoke to). A sufficient number of people had a problem with the moderated membership part that the idea was a non-starter, but I still like it think it could work. One piece of feedback I got at the time is designers just don't use mailing lists. I don't quite buy that, but perhaps people can rebut or confirm here? Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary GNOME Foundation member dne...@gnome.org ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
Hi Alan, FWIW I mostly like GNOME 3, so I don't want to pile on the flamefest. But this bothered me: On Sun 06 Feb 2011 15:27, Allan Day allanp...@gmail.com writes: Even if you had records of every discussion, you wouldn't get the information you're looking for. Design decisions don't get made committee meeting style, and design involves a lot of specialist background knowledge which doesn't get explicitly referenced. Fact is, we'll probably never be able to give 100% of the rationale behind design decisions. The thing is, we've done mostly well in the programming department. If the subtext is this is the case for design in contrast to programming, I would like to disagree; that would be unjust both to programming and to design. Often programming is just as solitary an affair, yet we manage to communicate in such a way that enables collaboration; and surely programmers are not more socially competent than designers ;-) Likewise designers don't work alone. I'm sure you have been one of two or three or six designers sitting at a table hashing things out. In neither profession do things happen committee meeting style -- when things go well, of course! -- but there is collaboration. This characterization of design also neglects the great community design work that has been done recently by Máirín, for example, and done to an extent within GNOME. Finally, it's rare that a programmer never does design work, or for a designer never to code at all. We all need pointers and records to figure out how things are done. Of course it's not always possible! But it would be an error not to hold transparency up as a goal, IMO. It simply isn't true to say that we haven't made an effort to explain what we're doing. I explained many of the design considerations in my blog post [1] on this subject, and I did that precisely because I wanted to help people to be informed. For this, and all your awesome work, thank you! Andy -- http://wingolog.org/ ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 14:27 +, Allan Day wrote: It simply isn't true to say that we haven't made an effort to explain what we're doing. I explained many of the design considerations in my blog post [1] on this subject, and I did that precisely because I wanted to help people to be informed. [snip] [1] http://afaikblog.wordpress.com/2011/02/03/on-laptop-lids-and-power-settings/ Regardless of the merits of the specific issue, and while I'm thankful that you are trying: That is an awful attempt at explaining anything. You waffle at great length about the issue, basically just saying that it's better because it's better, and then your actually say that you won’t for sake of brevity. Sorry, but I can't find a nice way to say that your write poorly. Filling a page with text is not the same as providing information. Hand-waving and waffling is not ultimately convincing. I recommend Strunk and White. I wish I had the time to investigate and write this up properly myself in a concise release-notes style, but I don't. -- murr...@murrayc.com www.murrayc.com www.openismus.com ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
Murray Cumming murr...@murrayc.com wrote: On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 14:27 +, Allan Day wrote: It simply isn't true to say that we haven't made an effort to explain what we're doing. I explained many of the design considerations in my blog post [1] on this subject, and I did that precisely because I wanted to help people to be informed. [snip] [1] http://afaikblog.wordpress.com/2011/02/03/on-laptop-lids-and-power-settings/ Regardless of the merits of the specific issue, and while I'm thankful that you are trying: That is an awful attempt at explaining anything. You waffle at great length about the issue, basically just saying that it's better because it's better, and then your actually say that you won’t for sake of brevity. Sorry, but I can't find a nice way to say that your write poorly. Filling a page with text is not the same as providing information. Hand-waving and waffling is not ultimately convincing. I recommend Strunk and White. Murray, It seems to me incredibly unproductive when someone shows up who is actually interested in writing about the GNOME design process to flame them for writing badly (which I find entirely unsubstantiated reading through Alan's post.) The fact we have any good information about the GNOME 3 design targeted at the general public is basically due to Alan - e.g., the currently state of https://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Design/ is largely his work. If you have questions that weren't answered, of course, ask them! If you have concrete suggestions for additional information that should have been provided, I'm sure that Alan would love to have them. But your message above combines rudeness to an enthusiastic new contributor to GNOME with the same lack of actual content that you accuse Alan of. - Owen ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
Yeah, we don't have that sort of service. If you'd like, I can talk with the rest of the crew about putting something together. On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 19:52 +0100, Andre Klapper wrote: On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 19:19 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: Is there a place where IRC logs of discussions from the various channels can be found? I am not aware of any automated GimpNet IRC channel logging and publishing. andre signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 01:04 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Andre Klapper ak...@gmx.net wrote:
On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 19:19 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
Is there a place where IRC logs of discussions from the various
channels can be found?
I am not aware of any automated GimpNet IRC channel logging and
publishing.
It would be very useful to have a bot around which logs conversations
on #gnome-{shell,design,os}
done, done and done.
et al
You'll have to be more specific.
and puts it up somewhere.
http://ilbot.colliertech.org/gnome-shell/today
http://ilbot.colliertech.org/gnome-design/today
http://ilbot.colliertech.org/gnome-os/today
A number
of GNOME channels already have bots to manage chanops, those could
probably be put to this use as well, if possible.
Poke me if things go offline. My web server isn't the most stable thing
in the world.
To cover the conversations that have already happened; maybe people
can put up their logs of these channels of the past year (or whatever
they have). We can then patch up the various logs to make a full log.
Let me know when you've got them and I'll post them in the same place.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 14:53 -0800, C.J. Adams-Collier wrote: Yeah, we don't have that sort of service. If you'd like, I can talk with the rest of the crew about putting something together. Slightly related, HipChat got IRC a step ahead (less geeky, more pleasant and with log recording). I mean, the concept not the product. http://www.hipchat.com/ (Just in case there is somebody interested in working in something like this :-) On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 19:52 +0100, Andre Klapper wrote: On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 19:19 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: Is there a place where IRC logs of discussions from the various channels can be found? I am not aware of any automated GimpNet IRC channel logging and publishing. andre -- Germán Póo-Caamaño http://www.gnome.org/~gpoo/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 5:58 PM, C.J. Adams-Collier c...@colliertech.org wrote:
On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 01:04 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Andre Klapper ak...@gmx.net wrote:
On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 19:19 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
Is there a place where IRC logs of discussions from the various
channels can be found?
I am not aware of any automated GimpNet IRC channel logging and
publishing.
It would be very useful to have a bot around which logs conversations
on #gnome-{shell,design,os}
done, done and done.
et al
You'll have to be more specific.
and puts it up somewhere.
http://ilbot.colliertech.org/gnome-shell/today
http://ilbot.colliertech.org/gnome-design/today
http://ilbot.colliertech.org/gnome-os/today
A number
of GNOME channels already have bots to manage chanops, those could
probably be put to this use as well, if possible.
Poke me if things go offline. My web server isn't the most stable thing
in the world.
To cover the conversations that have already happened; maybe people
can put up their logs of these channels of the past year (or whatever
they have). We can then patch up the various logs to make a full log.
Let me know when you've got them and I'll post them in the same place.
bebot has been logging for some time. I'd prefer it if we have only
one mechanism in place. We haven't had a chance to figure out what to
do with the logs (including where to post them, how to present them,
and how to search them). Another issue is that I want to ensure that
it is well known that the channels are logged (I consider it impolite
to post logs from folks that don't know they are being logged) and
that we make some assurance that sensitive information doesn't
accidentally get published (at least until you can change that
password you accidentally typed into IRC).
Would you mind disabling your bot until we do that?
Thanks,
Jon
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 18:37 -0500, William Jon McCann wrote:
Hi,
Howdy!
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 5:58 PM, C.J. Adams-Collier c...@colliertech.org
wrote:
On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 01:04 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Andre Klapper ak...@gmx.net wrote:
On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 19:19 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
Is there a place where IRC logs of discussions from the various
channels can be found?
I am not aware of any automated GimpNet IRC channel logging and
publishing.
It would be very useful to have a bot around which logs conversations
on #gnome-{shell,design,os}
done, done and done.
et al
You'll have to be more specific.
and puts it up somewhere.
http://ilbot.colliertech.org/gnome-shell/today
http://ilbot.colliertech.org/gnome-design/today
http://ilbot.colliertech.org/gnome-os/today
A number
of GNOME channels already have bots to manage chanops, those could
probably be put to this use as well, if possible.
Poke me if things go offline. My web server isn't the most stable thing
in the world.
To cover the conversations that have already happened; maybe people
can put up their logs of these channels of the past year (or whatever
they have). We can then patch up the various logs to make a full log.
Let me know when you've got them and I'll post them in the same place.
bebot has been logging for some time. I'd prefer it if we have only
one mechanism in place. We haven't had a chance to figure out what to
do with the logs (including where to post them, how to present them,
and how to search them). Another issue is that I want to ensure that
it is well known that the channels are logged (I consider it impolite
to post logs from folks that don't know they are being logged) and
that we make some assurance that sensitive information doesn't
accidentally get published (at least until you can change that
password you accidentally typed into IRC).
Would you mind disabling your bot until we do that?
Thanks,
Jon
From one of my fellow gimpnet IRC operators:
16:28 CyBeR cj: you should inform them that we (gimpnet) have no logging
service nor the intent to create one
16:28 CyBeR cj: and that open (as in, not +i or +k) channels should be
regarded as public
16:29 CyBeR and one should assume one's writings are logged and public when
conversing in one
That said, I'll put on my GNOME Foundation member hat and say that I'm
willing to help develop a logging facility for channels that the
foundation considers part of the core infrastructure.
Cheers,
C.J.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 5:36 PM, C.J. Adams-Collier c...@colliertech.org wrote:
On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 18:37 -0500, William Jon McCann wrote:
Hi,
Howdy!
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 5:58 PM, C.J. Adams-Collier c...@colliertech.org
wrote:
On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 01:04 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Andre Klapper ak...@gmx.net wrote:
On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 19:19 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
Is there a place where IRC logs of discussions from the various
channels can be found?
I am not aware of any automated GimpNet IRC channel logging and
publishing.
It would be very useful to have a bot around which logs conversations
on #gnome-{shell,design,os}
done, done and done.
et al
You'll have to be more specific.
and puts it up somewhere.
http://ilbot.colliertech.org/gnome-shell/today
http://ilbot.colliertech.org/gnome-design/today
http://ilbot.colliertech.org/gnome-os/today
A number
of GNOME channels already have bots to manage chanops, those could
probably be put to this use as well, if possible.
Poke me if things go offline. My web server isn't the most stable thing
in the world.
To cover the conversations that have already happened; maybe people
can put up their logs of these channels of the past year (or whatever
they have). We can then patch up the various logs to make a full log.
Let me know when you've got them and I'll post them in the same place.
bebot has been logging for some time. I'd prefer it if we have only
one mechanism in place. We haven't had a chance to figure out what to
do with the logs (including where to post them, how to present them,
and how to search them). Another issue is that I want to ensure that
it is well known that the channels are logged (I consider it impolite
to post logs from folks that don't know they are being logged) and
that we make some assurance that sensitive information doesn't
accidentally get published (at least until you can change that
password you accidentally typed into IRC).
Would you mind disabling your bot until we do that?
Thanks,
Jon
From one of my fellow gimpnet IRC operators:
16:28 CyBeR cj: you should inform them that we (gimpnet) have no logging
service nor the intent to create one
16:28 CyBeR cj: and that open (as in, not +i or +k) channels should be
regarded as public
16:29 CyBeR and one should assume one's writings are logged and public when
conversing in one
That said, I'll put on my GNOME Foundation member hat and say that I'm
willing to help develop a logging facility for channels that the
foundation considers part of the core infrastructure.
You would probably need multiple bots to fill the needs of the GNOME
community. Gimpnet has a fairly low max join limit, iirc.
I'd definitely be interested in this. One of the main reasons I run
irssi on my server is so that I have logs of channels that matter to
me.
BTW, combining this with an op bot like Rupert would be nice.
Sandy
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
Le samedi 05 février 2011 à 11:43 -0600, Paul Cutler a écrit : Development is not a democracy For a personal project, no. But Gnome is not your personal project, it's a community project. The light of this, you have a duty of openness to the whole community. So far I have mostly attended one-way debat with designers. Some people arrive with good arguments but they are ignored or they receive ridiculous and/or void cons-arguments. Impossible to have a good debat. Do you think this kind of behavior has its place in a community project? signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On 06/02/2011 14:13, Gendre Sebastien wrote: Le samedi 05 février 2011 à 11:43 -0600, Paul Cutler a écrit : Development is not a democracy For a personal project, no. But Gnome is not your personal project, it's a community project. Even if the practice shows that it is good to have dictator (see Linux). PERSONALI appreciate the cleanness of GNOME interface. I like that If there could be one do what I want button we would implement only that one. I don't like obviously removing features I use but I'd like to hear rationale of the decisions - I may agree that the change is justified even if my legitimate use of software is removed or that I use it incorrectly./PERSONAL The light of this, you have a duty of openness to the whole community. That's another matter. Openness and transparency is FLOSS projects are orthogonal. Regards ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
Le samedi 05 février 2011 à 15:55 -0600, Jason D. Clinton a écrit : You characterized the situation with the power manager as a crisis and yet, while your description is more than a little hyperbolic, that situation demonstrates that precisely what you are asking for is not productive. Ahah. Have to chose about What my computer do when the nid is close is not productive? Is it a joke. I think the problem is can choose what my computer do when the nid is close is opposit to designers decision and some designer think they are supperior to user. There were a total of four blog posts on the topic and approximately 200 comments posted to those. There wasn't any negative feedback on any of those four post's comments that was well researched or particularly informed about all the issues that need to be considered. Even people who tried to offer alternatives didn't seem particularly informed about common use cases or what other operating systems are doing (all research that had previously been done by the design team). There was some legitimate concerns expressed, particularly about why the research shows that AC and on-battery are the same situation, but that was a tiny minority of the feedback and not surprisingly, a large majority of this informed discussion happened on IRC in #gnome-os and #fedora-desktop--not on a mailing list or blog. Another joke? I have read some comments written with analysis: the logic. User have needs. When they are connect to IRC, when they download, when they transcode video, etc... In some case they need to close their nid (and turn off their screen) without turn their laptop to standby. This is not a case analysis? Not need lengthy studies to find it: just logic and observation. And if your sceen is not ruend off when you don't use it, this can cause problems: Broken backlight power supply is the main cause of breakdown on the LCD. And the reflex of user when it want turn off the screen, is to close the nid. And remember: People have no problem with the default behavior of the laptop when you close the lid, but with the absence to change this behavior. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On 02/05/2011 06:25 PM, Maciej Piechotka wrote: IRC channels seems to be used in gnome development. It may be just me but I believe that recent power setting crisis show (I contrast them to mailing lists): - Requires presence. Many people cannot afford being on irc 24/7 - both developers, potential developers or just interested users. The houres of the meeting may clash with working hours or other real live constraints. Yes, IRC has it drawbacks, but it also makes discussing design a lot faster and effective than doing it on mailing lists. We need to be time effective if we're going to make the April 6th release date. All designs goes in the wiki though and most (if not all) also live in this repo http://gitorious.org/gnome-design We totally need to make that stuff more visible though, and therefore I need your help with setting up a wordpress image blog where we can publish all the mockups (kind of like http://dribbble.com/). I can do the design bits, but need help with the other stuff. When are you able to work on this? - Andreas ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
I would not go so far as to recommend against discussing important items on irc, but there is general consensus that it is a somewhat ephemeral medium and that anything requiring persistence should also be documented as a bug or blog post. On Feb 5, 2011 9:26 AM, Maciej Piechotka uzytkown...@gmail.com wrote: IRC channels seems to be used in gnome development. It may be just me but I believe that recent power setting crisis show (I contrast them to mailing lists): - Requires presence. Many people cannot afford being on irc 24/7 - both developers, potential developers or just interested users. The houres of the meeting may clash with working hours or other real live constraints. - Not logged. Sometimes during discussion it was said that something was discussed extensively on #gnome-design. That is good however there is no method of figuring out what the arguments where. - Provides less informations. In e-mails I can do smart things like marking read/unread, putting into folders to read/to respond/ignore (or simply - unread: requires action, read: still important, in archive: no action required). Smart clients can even filter out irrelevant threads etc. With IRC I cannot do anything except reading it. There is no side informations and I cannot attach informations. Could there be a recommendation against discussion of important decisions on IRC? While I understand that it may slow down process probably but it would improve developer-user relationships as well as transparency and inclusiveness of process. Regards ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Andreas Nilsson nisses.m...@home.se wrote: On 02/05/2011 06:25 PM, Maciej Piechotka wrote: IRC channels seems to be used in gnome development. It may be just me but I believe that recent power setting crisis show (I contrast them to mailing lists): - Requires presence. Many people cannot afford being on irc 24/7 - both developers, potential developers or just interested users. The houres of the meeting may clash with working hours or other real live constraints. Yes, IRC has it drawbacks, but it also makes discussing design a lot faster and effective than doing it on mailing lists. We need to be time effective if we're going to make the April 6th release date. Is there a place where IRC logs of discussions from the various channels can be found? Thanks, -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On 06/02/2011 13:46, Andreas Nilsson wrote: All designs goes in the wiki though and most (if not all) also live in this repo http://gitorious.org/gnome-design As I said - there is difference between the result and process. There have been stated that the design team studied the topic but nowhere what the studies where (name of paper, anything). Maybe using the mailing list would slow down too much but having minutes and setting bot to log the messages probably would not. If there is discussion instead stating that settings kills kitties and small pandas you could just point at research that you based on - say research XYZ says ABC so IJK - instead of saying that there was some research that stated that. If you post what you based on (even only in case of more heated discussion - say 100 comments in beta) then: - Some people will just be impressed, recognize that decision was grounded on something etc. - Some people will read paper, improve their knowledge about UI design and agree with you. - Some people will read paper, improve their knowledge about UI design and disagree with you but using more constructive arguments. - Some people will not read paper and still comment but you still have benefit of not hearing from first 2 groups and having constructive arguments from 3rd. Regards ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
Hi, Maciej Piechotka wrote: FLAMEThen show delyourdelinsdesign team/ins work! All I'm hearing is that research have been done and the issue have been taken into consideration during disussion but I DON'T have any references. I cannot see logs of IRC (at least google is not showing them), blogs does not disclose why the decision was made in such way exactly and why the broken workflows are bad. All I'm hearing is that I'm uninformed. The decision presented on blog is presented as final final - not as a strong proposal (even if technically it is the same there are slight differences in PR). I'm not specialist in UI design - but I cannot even get response to information why my workflow is bad and how did you invision it (say - large backups during night)./FLAME Even if you had records of every discussion, you wouldn't get the information you're looking for. Design decisions don't get made committee meeting style, and design involves a lot of specialist background knowledge which doesn't get explicitly referenced. Fact is, we'll probably never be able to give 100% of the rationale behind design decisions. It simply isn't true to say that we haven't made an effort to explain what we're doing. I explained many of the design considerations in my blog post [1] on this subject, and I did that precisely because I wanted to help people to be informed. Basically - it seems that many people have feeling that their needs are being ignored in name of Average Joe and they are asked to leave. And I've repeatedly stated that that isn't the case (and it really isn't). There are a whole bunch of things in the GNOME 3 designs which are specifically intended for 'advanced' users: * Keyboard-only application launching and switching * Fancy workspaces stuff * Shell extensions * We designed a GNOME tweak utility [2] nearly a year ago I'm sure there's more... The plan is to make GNOME 3 the best desktop out there for a whole range of users, including those who are technically engaged. Sure - I might have done research on topic. I might start reading papers or even ask about them on #gnome-shell. I might have been rational But I guess that the discussion would be much less heated if the references were given - humans are not always rational. I proposed the change to have a shift from 180xYour design *** to even 10xHave you considered XYZ? - Yes - read paper ABC or even just include reference to ABC (give future historians when GNOME will rule the world some sources ;) ). There's a long list of references for the shell design on the wiki [3]. Much of the reading which is relevant to the settings is classic usability stuff, though. We do provide some relevant information on this [4, 5], if you're interested, but I don't think it's reasonable to expect us to reference the relevant studies for every single decision that we make. PS. To sum up - I think that community thin.ks that decision are made with practically closed doors (not everybody can even observe the discussion due to time constraints) and The only reason it appears that it's happened in the dark is because nobody's been looking. This design could have be seen on the wiki or design repository months ago. the results are posted as final truths as community is considered too stupid to understand People keep saying this... _nobody_ is saying that the community is stupid. (I'm NOT saying it is true - I'm saying it is the FEELING). I'm sure it would have been beneficial to have publicised potentially controversial plans ahead of time. Being able to 'break the news' in a more controlled way would help. Problem is: we don't have anybody who's properly employed to do GNOME community management work, and we don't have enough designers. Communication, documentation and forward planning all take time and energy. Allan [1] http://afaikblog.wordpress.com/2011/02/03/on-laptop-lids-and-power-settings/ [2] http://www.hadess.net/2010/02/were-removing-settings-again.html [3] http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Design/References [4] http://library.gnome.org/devel/hig-book/2.32/ [5] http://live.gnome.org/UsabilityProject/HeuristicEvaluation -- Blog: https://afaikblog.wordpress.com/ IRC: aday on irc.gnome.org ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
sø., 06.02.2011 kl. 15.39 +0100, skrev Gendre Sebastien: [SNIP] And remember: People have no problem with the default behavior of the laptop when you close the lid, but with the absence to change this behavior. I thought it was said early on in this thread that users can change this in dconf using dconf-editor[1]? Cheers Kjartan [1] dconf-editor crashes when trying to do this right now sadly https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=640089 ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On 06/02/2011 14:27, Allan Day wrote: Hi, Maciej Piechotka wrote: FLAMEThen show delyourdelinsdesign team/ins work! All I'm hearing is that research have been done and the issue have been taken into consideration during disussion but I DON'T have any references. I cannot see logs of IRC (at least google is not showing them), blogs does not disclose why the decision was made in such way exactly and why the broken workflows are bad. All I'm hearing is that I'm uninformed. The decision presented on blog is presented as final final - not as a strong proposal (even if technically it is the same there are slight differences in PR). I'm not specialist in UI design - but I cannot even get response to information why my workflow is bad and how did you invision it (say - large backups during night)./FLAME Even if you had records of every discussion, you wouldn't get the information you're looking for. Design decisions don't get made committee meeting style, and design involves a lot of specialist background knowledge which doesn't get explicitly referenced. Fact is, we'll probably never be able to give 100% of the rationale behind design decisions. I'm sorry. I had impression that you (as 'defenders') are referring to some specific studies. Basically - it seems that many people have feeling that their needs are being ignored in name of Average Joe and they are asked to leave. And I've repeatedly stated that that isn't the case (and it really isn't). As I said - that is the feeling. I'm not saying that designers don't care but the designers feel you don't care. There are a whole bunch of things in the GNOME 3 designs which are specifically intended for 'advanced' users: * Keyboard-only application launching and switching Technically present in GNOME 2 I believe (at least launching). * Fancy workspaces stuff While present state is suboptimal I agree that the direction seems more then promising. I'm looking forward to it. * Shell extensions * We designed a GNOME tweak utility [2] nearly a year ago Which I cannot find outside mockup in the link. There is Ubuntu tweak but I guess it won't work on non-Ubuntu. PS. To sum up - I think that community thin.ks that decision are made with practically closed doors (not everybody can even observe the discussion due to time constraints) and The only reason it appears that it's happened in the dark is because nobody's been looking. This design could have be seen on the wiki or design repository months ago. Yes. I've started thread to seek the ways to have easier ways to look. I think that posting minutes proposal would be a good way as users could spent 5 minutes a week to follow relevant for them changes) and I don't think that developers would be overwhelmed by it. SIDE NOTE: The log/minutes would have an additional benefit - it happened to me that some person stated that I've agree to do something but I couldn't recall the event and I am sure I haven't agree to do this. From logs I had in my empathy I couldn't find such event. Logging/minutes may have additional benefits for developers (as I might have agreed to do this but I've just forgot). Regards ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 14:46 +0100, Andreas Nilsson wrote: We totally need to make that stuff more visible though, and therefore I need your help with setting up a wordpress image blog where we can publish all the mockups (kind of like http://dribbble.com/). I can do the design bits, but need help with the other stuff. When are you able to work on this? http://blogs.gnome.org/ Lots of teams have team blogs. No need for new infrastructure. -- Shaun ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On 02/06/2011 06:35 PM, Shaun McCance wrote: On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 14:46 +0100, Andreas Nilsson wrote: We totally need to make that stuff more visible though, and therefore I need your help with setting up a wordpress image blog where we can publish all the mockups (kind of like http://dribbble.com/). I can do the design bits, but need help with the other stuff. When are you able to work on this? http://blogs.gnome.org/ Lots of teams have team blogs. No need for new infrastructure. Yes, that was the intention and it would be totally neat to have it as one of the feeds on news.gnome.org as well. I think it would need some plugins and stuff to make it more of a photo blog and stuff, but I need some help with that, since I kind of running out of time to do things right now (and Fosdem didn't help, you know, can't say no ;) ). I really, really, want the communication channels fixed though. It looked like Maciej wanted to put some time into working on fixing this too, hence why I asked for the help. - Andreas ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 15:39 +0100, Gendre Sebastien wrote: Le samedi 05 février 2011 à 15:55 -0600, Jason D. Clinton a écrit : You characterized the situation with the power manager as a crisis and yet, while your description is more than a little hyperbolic, that situation demonstrates that precisely what you are asking for is not productive. Ahah. Have to chose about What my computer do when the nid is close is not productive? Is it a joke. I think the problem is can choose what my computer do when the nid is close is opposit to designers decision and some designer think they are supperior to user. There were a total of four blog posts on the topic and approximately 200 comments posted to those. There wasn't any negative feedback on any of those four post's comments that was well researched or particularly informed about all the issues that need to be considered. Even people who tried to offer alternatives didn't seem particularly informed about common use cases or what other operating systems are doing (all research that had previously been done by the design team). There was some legitimate concerns expressed, particularly about why the research shows that AC and on-battery are the same situation, but that was a tiny minority of the feedback and not surprisingly, a large majority of this informed discussion happened on IRC in #gnome-os and #fedora-desktop--not on a mailing list or blog. Another joke? I have read some comments written with analysis: the logic. User have needs. When they are connect to IRC, when they download, when they transcode video, etc... In some case they need to close their nid (and turn off their screen) without turn their laptop to standby. This is not a case analysis? There are already APIs for specific applications to do that sort of thing. We don't need to add new buttons in the settings to avoid your computer suspending when you close the lid (at least Brasero, and Rhythmbox use those so that your computer doesn't go to sleep when burning, or playing music). Not need lengthy studies to find it: just logic and observation. And if your sceen is not ruend off when you don't use it, this can cause problems: Broken backlight power supply is the main cause of breakdown on the LCD. And the reflex of user when it want turn off the screen, is to close the nid. And remember: People have no problem with the default behavior of the laptop when you close the lid, but with the absence to change this behavior. There's already a way to override this. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 22:39 +0100, Andreas Nilsson wrote: I really, really, want the communication channels fixed though. It looked like Maciej wanted to put some time into working on fixing this too, hence why I asked for the help. While I fully understand why the help is expected from me unfortunately neither the knowledge about GNOME infrastructure, wordpress etc. nor real life constraints allow me to do this. I'm really sorry I cannot help. Regards signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
IRC channels in gnome development
IRC channels seems to be used in gnome development. It may be just me but I believe that recent power setting crisis show (I contrast them to mailing lists): - Requires presence. Many people cannot afford being on irc 24/7 - both developers, potential developers or just interested users. The houres of the meeting may clash with working hours or other real live constraints. - Not logged. Sometimes during discussion it was said that something was discussed extensively on #gnome-design. That is good however there is no method of figuring out what the arguments where. - Provides less informations. In e-mails I can do smart things like marking read/unread, putting into folders to read/to respond/ignore (or simply - unread: requires action, read: still important, in archive: no action required). Smart clients can even filter out irrelevant threads etc. With IRC I cannot do anything except reading it. There is no side informations and I cannot attach informations. Could there be a recommendation against discussion of important decisions on IRC? While I understand that it may slow down process probably but it would improve developer-user relationships as well as transparency and inclusiveness of process. Regards signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
You're asking to change the way things have been done for years - which isn't an argument to not do things that way, but just pointing it ou. However, the GNOME Design team has regular office hours in IRC where everyone is welcome to come and ask questions - I'm not a designer, but I don't know what more you can ask for if IRC is going to be used. Development is not a democracy - and for those who are going to do get things done, discussion via IRC and its immediacy is a powerful tool. I personally think asking IRC not to be used for important (which is relative) decisions is not realistic. Paul On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Maciej Piechotka uzytkown...@gmail.com wrote: IRC channels seems to be used in gnome development. It may be just me but I believe that recent power setting crisis show (I contrast them to mailing lists): - Requires presence. Many people cannot afford being on irc 24/7 - both developers, potential developers or just interested users. The houres of the meeting may clash with working hours or other real live constraints. - Not logged. Sometimes during discussion it was said that something was discussed extensively on #gnome-design. That is good however there is no method of figuring out what the arguments where. - Provides less informations. In e-mails I can do smart things like marking read/unread, putting into folders to read/to respond/ignore (or simply - unread: requires action, read: still important, in archive: no action required). Smart clients can even filter out irrelevant threads etc. With IRC I cannot do anything except reading it. There is no side informations and I cannot attach informations. Could there be a recommendation against discussion of important decisions on IRC? While I understand that it may slow down process probably but it would improve developer-user relationships as well as transparency and inclusiveness of process. Regards ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On Sat, 2011-02-05 at 11:43 -0600, Paul Cutler wrote: You're asking to change the way things have been done for years - which isn't an argument to not do things that way, but just pointing it ou. However, the GNOME Design team has regular office hours in IRC where everyone is welcome to come and ask questions - I'm not a designer, but I don't know what more you can ask for if IRC is going to be used. Development is not a democracy - and for those who are going to do get things done, discussion via IRC and its immediacy is a powerful tool. I personally think asking IRC not to be used for important (which is relative) decisions is not realistic. I do not think so. In the past, decisions that were discussed on IRC were informed by mail later or in bugzilla. Just to keep everybody interested in the loop and/or for archive purposes. At some point, we stopped doing it and, IMVVHO, is a bad practice. For instance, it is quite hard to explain and defend a decision when you only know the result (whether you personally agree or disagree). Do not confuse democracy with awareness. -- Germán Póo-Caamaño http://www.gnome.org/~gpoo/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On Sat, 2011-02-05 at 11:43 -0600, Paul Cutler wrote: You're asking to change the way things have been done for years - which isn't an argument to not do things that way, but just pointing it ou. However, the GNOME Design team has regular office hours in IRC where everyone is welcome to come and ask questions - I'm not a designer, but I don't know what more you can ask for if IRC is going to be used. I believe that the ask/question is not a problem. The problem is that you cannot easily follow the process. I'm not sure about office hours but: - They probably aren't in best timezone for all. Unfortunatly we have around 26 timezones and there is a chance that a) hours are too long and the relevant designer is not present b) they happen to be between 3 am and 5 am (or 10am and 12am) so not everybody can be there to observe the process. It is possible to stay awake one night to ask specific question but it is harder to do it constantly. - They are not widely know. I tried to googled them without success. They aren't in topic. etc. Development is not a democracy I have never argue to democratise the process. While in politics openness and democracy are considered near synonymous I don't think they necessary are in software development. While it might be a stretch analogy but some people argue in various companies (not every company and it may be argued how good the policy is) to open the discussion/design process to community (I think I heard about Dell, Starbucks and others). Of course it is company who plays the role of beneficial dictator in this model nonetheless the consumers may be proven to be valuable source of feedback and ideas (even if the need to be filtered out). - and for those who are going to do get things done, While it is my opinion I detest IRC even for my own projects for the same reasons that are stated - I prefer working in batch mode instead of online mode as I concentrate on one task. Of course I'm not arguing every developer detest (and apparently GNOME design team likes IRC). discussion via IRC and its immediacy is a powerful tool. I personally think asking IRC not to be used for important (which is relative) decisions is not realistic. Paul While it may be unrealistic it seems that at least some people are surprised that recent UI changes were surprise. Heatedness of debate were not helping but the discussion I've observed (one in blogosphere) was: A: The change . It breaks workflow XYZ. You ***. B: The issue was discussed extensively on IRC. We feel that Average Joe would benefit and workflow XYZ is broken and ***. The unanswered questions: - What exactly was discussed? What were the arguments? - Why workflow XYZ is broken? What should be the workflow be in designers mind?[1] Not using the IRC (or not only IRC) would help as: - Subscription to mailing list is much less consuming then joining IRC channel (low barier to entry - more real live usage and more informations about users workflows and more possibilities to correct them) - There is something persisting to point at. If anyone asks why decision was made you can point them at specific topic/e-mail in archive. Regards [1] Say the change was that there cannot be double enters in text processor and user complains (s)he cannot finish a page to start another the response may be that (s)he should use break page feature. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 13:43, Maciej Piechotka uzytkown...@gmail.com wrote: While it might be a stretch analogy but some people argue in various companies (not every company and it may be argued how good the policy is) to open the discussion/design process to community (I think I heard about Dell, Starbucks and others). Of course it is company who plays the role of beneficial dictator in this model nonetheless the consumers may be proven to be valuable source of feedback and ideas (even if the need to be filtered out). You characterized the situation with the power manager as a crisis and yet, while your description is more than a little hyperbolic, that situation demonstrates that precisely what you are asking for is not productive. There were a total of four blog posts on the topic and approximately 200 comments posted to those. There wasn't any negative feedback on any of those four post's comments that was well researched or particularly informed about all the issues that need to be considered. Even people who tried to offer alternatives didn't seem particularly informed about common use cases or what other operating systems are doing (all research that had previously been done by the design team). There was some legitimate concerns expressed, particularly about why the research shows that AC and on-battery are the same situation, but that was a tiny minority of the feedback and not surprisingly, a large majority of this informed discussion happened on IRC in #gnome-os and #fedora-desktop--not on a mailing list or blog. Design is a process which anyone is welcome to get involved in by way of researched proposals, mock-ups, or use-case studies. But asking the design team to post every decision that they make to d-d-l so that they can have the opportunity to be stop-energy-ed by community members who haven't researched or considered the situation, would not be productive. That isn't to say that more wiki documentation couldn't help. Specifically, I need some more documentation to make one of the marketing videos that are upcoming. But I'm not asking for that information so that I can argue about it--I'm not on the design team. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On 05/02/2011 21:55, Jason D. Clinton wrote: On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 13:43, Maciej Piechotka uzytkown...@gmail.com wrote: While it might be a stretch analogy but some people argue in various companies (not every company and it may be argued how good the policy is) to open the discussion/design process to community (I think I heard about Dell, Starbucks and others). Of course it is company who plays the role of beneficial dictator in this model nonetheless the consumers may be proven to be valuable source of feedback and ideas (even if the need to be filtered out). You characterized the situation with the power manager as a crisis crisis was meant to be hyperbolic. and yet, while your description is more than a little hyperbolic, that situation demonstrates that precisely what you are asking for is not productive. There is slight difference between documenting result, documenting rationale and documenting process. There were a total of four blog posts on the topic and approximately 200 comments posted to those. There wasn't any negative feedback on any of those four post's comments that was well researched or particularly informed about all the issues that need to be considered. Even people who tried to offer alternatives didn't seem particularly informed about common use cases or what other operating systems are doing (all research that had previously been done by the design team). There was some legitimate concerns expressed, particularly about why the research shows that AC and on-battery are the same situation, but that was a tiny minority of the feedback and not surprisingly, a large majority of this informed discussion happened on IRC in #gnome-os and #fedora-desktop--not on a mailing list or blog. FLAMEThen show delyourdelinsdesign team/ins work! All I'm hearing is that research have been done and the issue have been taken into consideration during disussion but I DON'T have any references. I cannot see logs of IRC (at least google is not showing them), blogs does not disclose why the decision was made in such way exactly and why the broken workflows are bad. All I'm hearing is that I'm uninformed. The decision presented on blog is presented as final final - not as a strong proposal (even if technically it is the same there are slight differences in PR). I'm not specialist in UI design - but I cannot even get response to information why my workflow is bad and how did you invision it (say - large backups during night)./FLAME Basically - it seems that many people have feeling that their needs are being ignored in name of Average Joe and they are asked to leave. I'm *not* saying that the design team have not done their job - but they seems to fail in communicating their rationale to some power users who feel angry. Sure - I might have done research on topic. I might start reading papers or even ask about them on #gnome-shell. I might have been rational But I guess that the discussion would be much less heated if the references were given - humans are not always rational. I proposed the change to have a shift from 180xYour design *** to even 10xHave you considered XYZ? - Yes - read paper ABC or even just include reference to ABC (give future historians when GNOME will rule the world some sources ;) ). Regards PS. To sum up - I think that community thinks that decision are made with practically closed doors (not everybody can even observe the discussion due to time constraints) and the results are posted as final truths as community is considered too stupid to understand (I'm NOT saying it is true - I'm saying it is the FEELING). It may be even more PR problem then technical one but I believe it is important one anyway. Contrast it with even Linux kernel where Linus is benevolent dictator and while some decisions may be considered controversial there is some discussion in public and loggable media. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On Feb 5, 2011 5:15 PM, Maciej Macin Piechotka maciej.piechotk...@imperial.ac.uk wrote: On 05/02/2011 21:55, Jason D. Clinton wrote: (all research that had previously been done by the design team). ... FLAMEThen show delyourdelinsdesign team/ins work! http://live.gnome.org/action/info/Design/SystemSettings/Power?action=info ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 05:25:08PM +, Maciej Piechotka wrote: Could there be a recommendation against discussion of important decisions on IRC? While I understand that it may slow down process probably but it would improve developer-user relationships as well as transparency and inclusiveness of process. We hold our release-team meetings on IRC and prefer to keep them on IRC. However, we make minutes and send them to the mailing list. Further, we discuss beforehand when a meeting will be held. Suggest that you propose such things. -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 02:52 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote: On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 05:25:08PM +, Maciej Piechotka wrote: Could there be a recommendation against discussion of important decisions on IRC? While I understand that it may slow down process probably but it would improve developer-user relationships as well as transparency and inclusiveness of process. We hold our release-team meetings on IRC and prefer to keep them on IRC. However, we make minutes and send them to the mailing list. Great. However: - Which mailing list? There is no gnome-design list listed and on gnome wiki there is only reference to gnome-shell mailing list. I am however nearly sure it is neither d-d-l nor g-s. - Why noone in discussion pointed out the minutes with arguments to complainers? Further, we discuss beforehand when a meeting will be held. Suggest that you propose such things. I'm sorry but English is my second language and I'm afraid I haven't understood last sentence. Regards signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On Sun, Feb 06, 2011 at 02:02:10AM +, Maciej Piechotka wrote: On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 02:52 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote: On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 05:25:08PM +, Maciej Piechotka wrote: Could there be a recommendation against discussion of important decisions on IRC? While I understand that it may slow down process probably but it would improve developer-user relationships as well as transparency and inclusiveness of process. We hold our release-team meetings on IRC and prefer to keep them on IRC. However, we make minutes and send them to the mailing list. Great. However: - Which mailing list? There is no gnome-design list listed and on gnome wiki there is only reference to gnome-shell mailing list. I am however nearly sure it is neither d-d-l nor g-s. release-team mailing list. Depending on the topic, devel-announce-list is informed. - Why noone in discussion pointed out the minutes with arguments to complainers? I'm talking about the release team, not what you're referring to (#gnome-design channel only?). You've requested everyone in GNOME not to discuss important decisions on IRC. I'm pointing out that #1 works fine for release-team and #2 your request is pretty generic. Further, we discuss beforehand when a meeting will be held. Suggest that you propose such things. I'm sorry but English is my second language and I'm afraid I haven't understood last sentence. We (release team) make various efforts to keep everyone informed. By minutes and discussing beforehand when we meet. Further, we send to devel-announce-list when needed. If one team (#gnome-design) doesn't follow that, you can do various things to actually make things better. A few changes/additions to the way they work to ensure the process is workable for everyone. This e.g. by minutes, agreeing on meeting times, etc. -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: IRC channels in gnome development
On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 03:13 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote: On Sun, Feb 06, 2011 at 02:02:10AM +, Maciej Piechotka wrote: On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 02:52 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote: On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 05:25:08PM +, Maciej Piechotka wrote: Could there be a recommendation against discussion of important decisions on IRC? While I understand that it may slow down process probably but it would improve developer-user relationships as well as transparency and inclusiveness of process. We hold our release-team meetings on IRC and prefer to keep them on IRC. However, we make minutes and send them to the mailing list. Great. However: - Which mailing list? There is no gnome-design list listed and on gnome wiki there is only reference to gnome-shell mailing list. I am however nearly sure it is neither d-d-l nor g-s. release-team mailing list. Depending on the topic, devel-announce-list is informed. Ups. Sorry - I thought you are from design team. Further, we discuss beforehand when a meeting will be held. Suggest that you propose such things. I'm sorry but English is my second language and I'm afraid I haven't understood last sentence. We (release team) make various efforts to keep everyone informed. By minutes and discussing beforehand when we meet. Further, we send to devel-announce-list when needed. If one team (#gnome-design) doesn't follow that, you can do various things to actually make things better. A few changes/additions to the way they work to ensure the process is workable for everyone. This e.g. by minutes, agreeing on meeting times, etc. Sounds sensible. As it was stated that they discussed it extensively in such minutes there would be more information about topic hence something to refer to. Regards signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
