Yep, the social aspects like on addons.mozilla.com should also be part of The Herd, imo.
I agree with Gary. That's why I wanted to include improving performance as a major goal. Specifically, the tickets he mentioned, adding back old features and replacing the annotation service. Regarding planning for 0.2, I think it's just about setting the long term goals. In the end, they have to be broken to smaller milestones as Aza said. So, I think that performance issues, a goal for 0.2, should probably be the focus for 0.1.4 (assuming 0.1.3 is focused on skinning). Or we should swap the focuses. 0.1.3 should be for performance issues. I would really like the context menu and noun-first suggestions back. And of course, we should really try not to break people's current behavior (esp. noun-first suggestions). I feel like we need to delegate work (at least for a few key issues) to make faster progress. - Abi 2008/11/4 Gary Hodgson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Hi guys, > > Whilst some of the goals for 0.2 sound fun, in my opinion there are some > fundamentals that perhaps should be addressed beforehand. For example, > reintroducing functionality that was lost with 0.1.2 (e.g. tickets #358, > #359 & #394 are some I raised about this :-), stabilising the codebase, and > addressing performance. Something else that really needs addressing is the > trust-network and the way commands are subscribed to. I've read a few blog > posts, and received a couple of emails, saying that the major factor that is > stopping people from adopting Ubiquity is the security risk of subscribing > to new commands. > > Perhaps these are planned for a prior release, but considering 0.1.2 was > about 6 weeks late, and 0.1.3 still has 28 active tickets, planning 0.2 for > the end of 2008 seems a little over-ambitious. I don't want to rain on the > parade - I love hacking away at new stuff with the best of them - but > without some core stability I think the user base will lose interest and > we'll be left with an interesting toy for a handful of people, but no > wide-spread adoption. > > Of course this is only my take on things, and perhaps not seeing the bigger > picture :-) I hope these comments are taken in a positive way. > > Cheers > > Gary > > > On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 6:10 PM, Fernando Takai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> Yes, but herd needs to be improved. For example, we need to add social >> features like rating, commenting -- and we need to have a place to host >> commands, like gist, but ours. >> >> On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 2:08 PM, Dean Landolt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 1:03 PM, Fernando Takai <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> Ubiquity planet is like an addon.firefox.com for commands (if im not >>>> mistaken). >>> >>> >>> Wouldn't that be the Herd? >>> >>> Typically planets are just aggregators for specific communities of >>> interest [1] -- so of people that often blog about Ubiquity, it's just one >>> central place that pulls in those posts. Unless you mean something else, >>> Aza? >>> >>> [1] >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_(software)<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_%28software%29> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Fernando "Takai" >> http://flickr.com/photos/supeertakai >> http://fernandotakai.wordpress.com >> http://fernandotakai.jaiku.com >> >> >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ubiquity-firefox" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/ubiquity-firefox?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
