Response to "Getting Fedora Out of the If-Then Loop"
thomasj at fedoraproject.org
Sat Feb 20 17:51:20 UTC 2010
2010/2/20 Paul W. Frields <stickster at gmail.com>:
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 08:44:56PM -0500, Máirín Duffy wrote:
>> Hi Greg,
>> On Thu, 2010-02-18 at 17:30 -0500, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
>> > Think of it this way: every Fedora subproject, from the lowest SIG to the
>> > loftiest, competes for resources, to a greater or lesser extent.
>> > Like the homepage, for instance. The homepage of redhat.com, for example,
>> > is the subject of insanely brutal infighting, because everyone wants to
>> > see their baby get equal treatment. Which is fair, btw, and which we will
>> > see more and more in Fedora-land as we continue to discuss issues of
>> > "focus".
>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention_economy
>> > "Attention", or "focus" if you prefer, is a scarce resource. If you work
>> > on KDE or Xfce, and all of the conversation is continually around "focus",
>> > and it seems like that "focus" discussion continues to be "a usability
>> > focus on the primary spin," then one wonders "will I have access to these
>> > resources?" In fact, one knows the answer, and therefore doesn't bother
>> > to ask.
>> Those resources are not as fluid or transferable as they seem in the
>> abstract, though. Adam enjoys working on XFCE. Nobody is going to force
>> him to stop working on it - it's just not reasonable. I have no QT or
>> KDE app design expertise. If we suddenly decided to focus on the KDE
>> spin as the default spin, am I going to be expected to start churning
>> out mockups for KDE apps or am I going to be prevented from continuing
>> to work on mockups for GTK+-based apps?
>> There's a reality here that's not being acknowledged, and it has little
>> to do with popularity. I hope folks who work on XFCE or KDE in Fedora
>> don't come into those projects with the expectation that the same amount
>> of resources are dedicated to those as the desktop spin - because that's
>> never been true, and I sure hope they've not been misled into thinking
>> so. If I go to a Honda dealer in order to buy a Chevy I saw an ad for in
>> the paper, I do go with the full understanding that they're a Honda
>> dealership and don't argue with the dealer that he should have that used
>> Cobalt in red, blue, and silver as well as black.
> It's important we realize this isn't just about spins or desktop
> environments. It's also about the people who work on QA, release
> engineering, docs, marketing, testing, and so forth. Since time
> immemorial we've had unresolved questions about how to resolve
> conflicts between how our technology moves, what should be documented
> by default, how QA picks targets for testing... all of these questions
> have been around for a while. In part we're trying to acknowledge
> those issues and move on. At the same time, recognizing those areas
> may have scant resources, we want to identify the gaps they create
> clearly. That way, contributors *know where their help is needed*,
> and also have the opportunity to gather like-minded people to work on
> closing them.
Interesting. As the KDE SIG decided (IIRC it was pointed out that we
need that) that we do better QA for the KDE Desktop spin, i sent a
mail to the list introduced myself and applied for the QA group in
FAS. I still wait to get approved for QA. I dont want to say it's
because of KDE is not part of the QA work that's going on. I just want
to show that it's frustrating to want to do the work, already doing
the work (as possible), but not getting applied.
Dubium sapientiae initium
More information about the advisory-board