Updates next steps

[William Jon McCann]

Hi,

On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 5:29 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 23:15 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote:
>> Am Mittwoch, den 21.04.2010, 12:02 -0400 schrieb William Jon McCann:
>> > Hey folks,
>> >
>> > We discussed this a bit on IRC yesterday but I wanted to bring it up
>> > on the list too.
>> >
>> > Now that we have rough consensus that we should try to limit the
>> > volume of "pointless" updates, what is next?
>>
>> I wonder who is "we" and why this is discussed on the desktop list and
>> not in f-d-l.
>
> Indeed. I believe FESCo has approved a policy on enhanced *testing* of
> candidate updates, but that's all. I don't believe there is a consensus
> on restricting updates by type, or grouping them.

So, that's cool.  I take it back - let's not limit pointless updates -
it is certainly a silly idea.  ;)

Jokes aside, this is what Jesse and ajax told me on IRC that we (the
project) had decided.  So I was just repeating it here.

Most of the time when I say "we" on this list I mean the people who
are interested in designing and defining the user experience of this
desktop thing.  Some of the time I refer to people who have some
expertise or opinions I respect in the area of experience design.
Other times I mean "I".  Which one I mean will depend on the
situation.  If that is too confusing then just assume I mean "I",
think carefully about the matter, and challenge me on it in a
constructive way.  (where constructive means "how you'd do it if you
had to and your reputation depended on it").

We can continue to have discussions about having discussions about
making great things or we can just make great things.  Believe it or
not given the opportunity and the will - I know we can.  But dithering
is death.

It is pretty clear that we want to make the user experience around
updates better for our users - now we need to do it.  There will be
people who don't agree (at least until we demonstrate it is better by
actually doing it) but we need to do it anyway.

If possible, I'd really like to keep the discussion in this thread
related to ideation on how we can accomplish the two things I
mentioned.  From that we can develop a proposal that includes the why.

Thanks,
Jon