[Fedora-marketing-list] Fedora usability : a new project?

[Paul W. Frields]

On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 12:59 +0530, Rahul wrote:
> Paul W. Frields wrote:
> > On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 14:53 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> >> Le Mar 8 août 2006 13:14, Paul W. Frields a écrit :
> >>
> >>>> We have a great product. That needs promoting and user feed back.
> >>> The first is what Marketing is for.  The second is what Bugzilla is for.
> >> I strongly disagree.
> > [...snip...]
> > 
> > Thank you Nicolas, this is the first substantial discussion I've seen on
> > this topic.  I really have no opposition to a SIG for this work, but I
> > want to see it hashed out on the appropriate lists transparently, not
> > unilaterally announced.  Unless I missed the big discussion elsewhere --
> > which is possible; unlike the superhuman Rahul, I monitor only a subset
> > of the work going on!  (I don't know how he does it, honestly.)
> > 
> 
> Nicolas comments can be summed up as Red Hat does more work on upstream 
> than it does on polish which is what I said in the earlier board 
> discussions too. You shouldnt be missing that being a member yourself.

Rahul,

It's possible that you're missing the point of this particular
discussion.  It wasn't that I don't understand the potential goals of a
Usability initiative (I do), nor that I don't understand a need for it
(I do), nor that I didn't understand Nicolas' comments (I did).  The
entire problem -- and you will see the threads on fedora-advisory-board
to this effect -- is that announcements are being made about "official"
Feodra projects without any prior discussion about those needs, setting
concrete goals and objectives, and so forth.  I came back with some
comments intended to raise issues about possible duplication of effort
and get people talking about it.  I don't mind being wrong, but the
discussion needs to take place.

My final comment was intended to point out that I hadn't seen any of
this discussion, although there was a possibility they were being held
somewhere that I hadn't seen them.  Those should be community
discussions like RFCs where interested parties can hash them out before
bringing them to the proper venue for backing.

I haven't missed your comments in board meetings, but they don't
constitute public discussion either, AFAICT.

-- 
Paul W. Frields, RHCE                          http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
       Fedora Project Board: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board
    Fedora Docs Project:  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-marketing-list/attachments/20060809/27429c9d/attachment.sig>