Talking points change needed?

[Paul W. Frields]

On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 02:56:47PM -0700, Robyn Bergeron wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Paul Frields <stickster at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 10:42 PM, Robyn Bergeron
> > <robyn.bergeron at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 5:20 AM, Paul W. Frields <stickster at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 08:06:50AM -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> >>>> The user management interface redesign is a "tech preview" in F13, as
> >>>> opposed to final.  Unfortunately the Desktop SIG members working on
> >>>> the feature aren't able to comfortably make it a default yet, because
> >>>> there are a few integration pieces left to complete.  It will still be
> >>>> available for installation and use, but not enabled by default, in
> >>>> F13.
> >>>>
> >>>> Should we remove this point from the talking points list for user
> >>>> features?  Doing so would still leave five points in that category.
> >>>
> >>> Hm, also found that the "yum langpack" feature has been moved off for
> >>> now as well.  I sent a note to FESCo asking them to notify the
> >>> Marketing and Docs teams in the future when features are dropped.
> >>> There should be no more feature dropping this cycle, but it would be
> >>> good to hear about it sooner in F14.
> >>>
> >>> Still leaves four points for users, which is well within the 3-5 range
> >>> we originally wanted to include.
> >>
> >> Okay - I'm going to delete the langpack stuff off of Talking Points,
> >> since we have the rule of "no talking points that aren't on feature
> >> list," iirc.  (Or maybe that was never officially decided, but I'm
> >> going with it for now.)
> >>
> >> But - user account dialog is still in feature list, at 100%.  Do we
> >> call it experimental user management interface, techpreview user
> >> management interface, or ... ?
> >>
> >> Thoughts? Anyone?
> >
> > I'd remove it from the talking points.  It's OK for other material to
> > reference it, just like we can continue to reference the Moblin Spin
> > even if its content may be a little in flux. The announcement text
> > refers to the new user account dialog work as "experimental" which is
> > accurate -- it's a WiP.  As for Moblin, the Spin is still something
> > approved even if there's no "Moblin 2.2" per se.  We can still
> > reference it and refer to the current content as paving the way for a
> > MeeGo based spin, I would think.
> 
> Okay, i removed the user account dialog stuff from talking points.  We
> left it in the beta announcement and listed it as experimental (rrix,
> ke4qqq and i talked about it Friday night) - does this seem
> reasonable?

Makes sense to me.

-- 
Paul W. Frields                                http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
          Where open source multiplies: http://opensource.com