[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-commits
Subject:    Re: www/areas/usability/hig
From:       Frans Englich <frans.englich () telia ! com>
Date:       2004-08-23 21:08:49
Message-ID: 200408232108.49642.frans.englich () telia ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sunday 22 August 2004 12:40, Aaron Seigo wrote:
> On Sunday 22 August 2004 04:04, Frans Englich wrote:
> > CVS commit by englich:
> > However, all this depends on people's reactions. If there's a better way
> > this can be done/timed/whatever, it is of course important to do that
> > instead. All I know is what have been mentioned on KDE's lists(and
> > related news/blog sites). Aaron, you've expressed strong opinions about
> > this project -- this is a great opportunity to provide feedback so it
> > doesn't crash with anything else you might know about.
>
> i already have expressed that i do not want to see this happen and that it
> does conflict directly with one of the two primary process-related topics
> that will be covered in the usability track here at aKademy. (the other
> process-related topic has to do with openusability.org)
>
> but despite having requested that you hold off for a couple days and
> instead participate in the usability track via IRC or whatever mechanism
> you can, you have gone ahead and done this anyways. i'm not your manager,
> but i am someone who is theoretically working towards common goals with
> you, and both of us are supposed to be doing that w/regards to the rest of
> the project.
>
> by not doing this you seriously degrade the respectability of the usability
> project and make me question your ability to work with the rest of us in
> this regard.

About two weeks before aKademy I wrote as a reply to a thread of yours on 
kde-usability:

"Sounds good. Are you planning to actually extend the guidelines at aKademy? 
Then it could be a good idea of me to prioritize the docbook'ing and move to 
usability.kde.org."

But your reply neither denied or confirmed.  I have already pointed this out 
in the reply[2] to your first letter.

As also pointed out in that reply, this docbook'ing have been mentioned on 
several mailinglists, and many people have had a chance to intervene, but 
they haven't. These multiple mails about me not working with "the rest of us" 
but in isolation etc. etc. -- I simply think it have no validness.

>
> here's the simple explanation for why what you are doing is a bad idea,
> because i know you'll probably just ask for it (again) if i don't:
>
>  o reforming the UIG requires buy in from all stakeholders, which you do
> not have with your fork. 
> i do not see how you can claim that your fork is 
> "soon to become version 1.0" when you lack this consensus.

As Waldo said, it's not a big deal since it's only the technical background 
which have been replaced. Feel free to think it would be better to start from 
scratch.
As Jason B. pointed out; the version 1.0(which will be tagged and released 
once new content is to be committed) is not new content or anything, it is 
simply the current/old HIG with a new face, location and which will be used 
in development as we work on a new version. I don't think there's much to be 
agreed upon.

It surprises me it causes confusion since my commit logs have been extensive. 
For example:
"My plan is to cvs tag hig/src, and then generate a version 1.0 of the UIG 
into hig/1.0. In this way, we have a readable, accessible, _stable_ document 
for development, while aKademy people and all other interested can together 
work on a new version in hig/src which will be generated into hig/current. 
Safe, practical and flexible."

>
>  o we can't have standards when there are forks. we now have guidelines on
> both developer.kde.org and usability.kde.org and that is not only
> completely against the idea of interface STANDARDS but is beyond
> ridiculous. i look forward to seeing the (justfiable) "KDE is stupid
> because..." flames on the web as a result of this once someone actually
> notices =(

In the reply mentioned above([2]) I also pointed out that there shouldn't be 
any confusion. I quote:
"* The only one who knows about this is subscribers of kde-usability and 
kde-cvs, which have read the commit message. It have not been announced. The 
commit message clearly said 1) It is work in progress("initial commit",  
comments on what follows) and that people shouldn't touch it: "Next commit 
will be an readability edit(don't touch it until that's done)"
* It haven't been linked from usability.kde.org or any other place"

To night, links will be updated, the "old" HIG removed, and the new place 
announced -- then this issue should not be discussable anymore.

> seriously.... stop this. if you don't, i will simply seek other measures to
> ensure you do such as restricting your rights to commit to
> www/areas/usability


			Frans

1.
http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-usability&m=109173126326515&w=2

2.
http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-cvs&m=109294273703384&w=2
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

Configure | About | News | Add a list | Sponsored by KoreLogic