Re: [Plone-developers] [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 4 Framework Team Selection List
Wichert Akkerman wrote: Previously Tom Lazar wrote: this is a fundamental change in how the framework team will operate from now on. we're no longer just a group of individuals who quietly need to make some sense of PLIPs and their implementation on their own but more of a clearing house. So, do I understand correctly that the group of people that selected the framework team (which does not include those selected people itself) has also gone one step further and defined a whole new process for how that team will work? As one of the responsible ones for that decision I'll add my view as well. I think we all share Wichert's concerns that UI needs to get more attention - and so does documentation. As has been pointed out already there is an expectation that the way in which the framework team is going to work might change (and I stress this is an expectation by some at this point - no clear cut decisions yet. And yes, that can be criticized.). Rather than having team members with different domains of expertise taking care of different aspects of PLIPs it has been suggested that framework team members act more like editors of a scientific journal meaning they can decide on acceptance if they feel comfortable with the decision but they usually ask for advice from respected players in the field. This can take any form in principle. Here, my expectation is that team members may choose to bring up whatever they think needs to be considered - either on the dev list or by actively approaching someone they trust. They take the responsibility for the decision they make but they don't necessarily do the work of reviewing and evaluating everything themselves. It is still not an easy task as people can fail to address the right issues in the first place but I do have a strong trust in the appointed team that they will do their best also when it comes to UI evaluations and improvements as well as to documentation matters. Sure enough we don't know yet whether this will work as expected but at least I do see a chance that this could even be better than having one or two (usually very busy) UI experts on the team who are expected to look at each and every PLIP with respect to UI issues. Just my 2 cents, Raphael Wichert. ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Plone-developers] [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 4 Framework Team Selection List
Previously Martin Aspeli wrote: > >From what I understood the reason for the private list was to allow you > > to discuss individuals without having to worry about being overly > > political or hurting anyones feelings. > > Unfortunately, no-one will be able to address your specific concerns > without doing exactly that. You made a point about an individual that > you'd nominated. I did not speak about any individual, nor did I nominate someone. I objected to the lack of any UI design experience in the chosen team. The fact that I happen to know someone who both has the experience and volunteered is not relevant here. I do not care who gets chosen. I do care about the right expertise being present. Wichert. -- Wichert Akkerman It is simple to make things. http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple. ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Plone-developers] [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 4 Framework Team Selection List
Previously Tom Lazar wrote: > this is a fundamental change in how the framework team will operate > from now on. we're no longer just a group of individuals who quietly > need to make some sense of PLIPs and their implementation on their own > but more of a clearing house. So, do I understand correctly that the group of people that selected the framework team (which does not include those selected people itself) has also gone one step further and defined a whole new process for how that team will work? Wichert. -- Wichert Akkerman It is simple to make things. http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple. ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Fwd: [Plone-developers] [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 4 Framework Team Selection List
On 18 Dec 2008, at 10:34, Wichert Akkerman wrote: Collecting external input and outside reviews is a nice idea, but things like user interface and documentation should be a full part of the process, and therefore should be reflected in the membership of the group which makes decisions based on those factors. I think I'll answer this, as in my initial mail nominating myself you asked about my UI experience: On 5 Nov 2008, at 12:54, Matthew Wilkes wrote: - loves to make sure a user interface is as simple as possible Less so, I'm a terminal junkie. I know what I hate, as it were, for example adding a new user with the manager role in PAS is dire, but I'm more interested in ensuring integrators can easily customise a UI than perfecting the OOTB one. As long as it's usable it's enough for me. Although UI isn't my number one concern, I certainly don't plan on ignoring it. It's our job to do a rounded evaluation of the PLIPs, we'd be negligent if we ignored UI. That doesn't mean we need to be UI experts personally. As you say, there are plenty of people in the community for us to consult, and I know people in real life. My code has to go through usability testing, I don't see why I should put my name to anything that doesn't meet the standards I'm held to. Matt ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Plone-developers] [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 4 Framework Team Selection List
On 18.12.2008, at 11:48, Wichert Akkerman wrote: On 12/18/08 11:43 AM, Tom Lazar wrote: and therefore should be reflected in the membership of the group which makes decisions based on those factors. i think that conclusion is the only part where we disagree. can we agree at least on that? ;-) Not without a way to guarantee that user interface will be a full part of the process, which incudes the guarantee that everything will go through a proper user interface review done by people with the right skillset, and can be rejected even if just the user interface is not up to par. good point. but i can't see how this would be influenced by whether or not one member of the fwt was a UI person: no single member has a veto right anyway (on the one hand) and on the other side: if, say, danny told me that the plip i'm evaluating is unacceptable from a UI perspective then i wouldn't just vote it in. there'd be a public discussion (probably on the list) about the issues he raises. i think that everybody shares your concerns regarding the importance of the UI (and that Plone 4 will need to become a whole lot simpler that Plone 3!) but there simply can't be any 'formal guarantee' (i.e. by insisting on UI experts be fwt members)) that these issues will be treated properly. in the end it comes down to how much we all care about plone (about which there can be no doubt regarding the new team) and the collective wisdom of the entire(!) community (which is completely independent from the fwt composition). but perhaps we could make the 'UI impact component' a formal part of the evaluation of a PLIP, i.e. add it as a formal part of the structure of a PLIP (in addition to the current ones such as Deliverables, Participants etc.) that way the issue could never be missed (i imagine that many UI flaws come into existence because technical people didn't realize there *was* a UI perspective to the given issue). Also, it would make it easy to get an overview of the UI impact of all of the submitted PLIPs by simply focussing on those parts of the PLIPs. anybody care to add their $0.02? tom ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Plone-developers] [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 4 Framework Team Selection List
On 12/18/08 11:43 AM, Tom Lazar wrote: and therefore should be reflected in the membership of the group which makes decisions based on those factors. i think that conclusion is the only part where we disagree. can we agree at least on that? ;-) Not without a way to guarantee that user interface will be a full part of the process, which incudes the guarantee that everything will go through a proper user interface review done by people with the right skillset, and can be rejected even if just the user interface is not up to par. Wichert. ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Plone-developers] [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 4 Framework Team Selection List
On 18.12.2008, at 11:34, Wichert Akkerman wrote: [...] things like user interface and documentation should be a full part of the process, absolutely and therefore should be reflected in the membership of the group which makes decisions based on those factors. i think that conclusion is the only part where we disagree. can we agree at least on that? ;-) cheers, tom Wichert. -- Wichert Akkerman It is simple to make things. http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple. -- SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/ ___ Plone-developers mailing list plone-develop...@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plone-developers ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Plone-developers] [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 4 Framework Team Selection List
On 18.12.2008, at 11:21, Martin Aspeli wrote: In particular, one of the things we'd discussed and would like to see more of, is a consultative approach where the framework team reviewer asks for review from people outside the team. Anyone who is motivated to contribute opinions will be heartily encouraged to do so, and it will be within the framework team's remit to actively solict those opinions. i really want to stress this point (if only by repeating it here...) this is a fundamental change in how the framework team will operate from now on. we're no longer just a group of individuals who quietly need to make some sense of PLIPs and their implementation on their own but more of a clearing house. i can't imagine that any PLIP will be approved or denied without the evaluating fwt members having consulted with at least one of the 'usual UI suspects' beforehand. and as wichert himself already mentioned: all of those are currently very busy anyway, so i think it's best for everybody, if they are relieved from the 'leg work' and can focus on UI issues without having to follow all of the fwt discussions and proceedings. cheers, tom ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Plone-developers] [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 4 Framework Team Selection List
Previously Martin Aspeli wrote: > Wichert, > > I can assure you that UI expertise was a factor in the discussion, as > was the need for a balanced team. The selection decision that was made > was unanimous, and followed healthy, constructive debate. Which makes me all the more baffled that UI expertise is completely missing from the resulting team. > I don't think it's appropriate to "strongly suggest that this decision > is reconsidered". This undermines the selection process and cannot be > addressed without either opening the archives for the discussion, or > starting down a slippery slope of discussing individuals in way that > could quickly become destructive. It also undermines the current team > before they have had a chance to prove themselves. I see no reason not to voice an opinion I have, especially considering the importance of the matter at stake. You are free to ignore it of course. > The selection committee was granted a private mailing list precisely > so that they would be able to have a factual debate. I really do not > want anyone who was part of that debate to feel the need to justify > the decision on any one individual. >From what I understood the reason for the private list was to allow you to discuss individuals without having to worry about being overly political or hurting anyones feelings. That is perfectly reasonably and I have no objection to that at all. I do have a problem with what I consider to be a step back in our process. We started on a path to do be much better about the Plone release process: the first step was adding UI experience to the team, and the next step was going to be to better about making documentation a part of the process. From my perspective it looks like that whole plan is now gone and the focus is entirely on technology again. Collecting external input and outside reviews is a nice idea, but things like user interface and documentation should be a full part of the process, and therefore should be reflected in the membership of the group which makes decisions based on those factors. Wichert. -- Wichert Akkerman It is simple to make things. http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple. ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
