Re: On the Interaction with the design team

[Matthew Paul Thomas <mpt postinbox com>]

Lapo Calamandrei wrote on 06/06/11 17:20:
>...
> 2011/6/6 Dave Neary <dneary gnome org>:
>...
>> I feel that the current operation of the design team is hurting our
>> relationship with Canonical, who also have designers who have, I
>> believe, failed to influence design discussions in the same measure as
>> the "core" members of the design team like Lapo, Allan, Jon.

However good or bad Gnome's design processes are, I don't think those
processes have anything to do with the relationship with Canonical. The
reason Canonical designers have not influenced Gnome design discussions
is that we are not instructed to take part, and most of us haven't even
heard of #gnome-design. (To be clear, nobody's telling us *not* to take
part, it's just not part of our jobs.)

That may be a good thing or a bad thing. I can certainly see drawbacks:
for example, I have lost count of the number of times one of my
colleagues has sketched something that assumes the existence of
gnome-about-me, and I've had to say "uh, that doesn't exist any more".
Or when they've talked about having a unified settings panel for online
accounts, oblivious to the Web Accounts panel being designed and
implemented upstream as they speak.

>>                                                              I think
>> the lack of documentation of the core design team makes it harder for
>> new designers to get involved.

I do agree with this. For most of the Gnome designs I come across, I
think: What stage is this at? Is this supposed to be a draft, or the
final design? What alternatives have been considered so far? What
benefits and disadvantages have been predicted in each? Have any of the
predictions been tested with users? How could I most productively
suggest another alternative? Getting answers to those questions
shouldn't require waiting for the right person to turn up on IRC.

>>                                To sum it all up, I believe the current
>> dynamic of the design team is doing damage to GNOME as a community.
>
> Would you elaborate this? Adding some facts please?

For example, I think a lot of the discontent with Gnome Shell could be
calmed if the wireframes of alternatives that were considered were
published, and if user testing results were published too.

> Unfortunatelly IRC is the only tool which work fo us atm (since google
> pulled wave which was nice), we're very open and responsive on the
> channel, I listen to every suggestion I get and answer any question,
> just hang on the channel and see.

An XMPP chat room (as used for Inkscape developer discussion, for
example) has the relevant advantage that history can be easily available
even to people who weren't in the room at the time.

>                                   Also the repositories we are using
> are open and everybody can participate.

Requiring designers to learn git limits the number and type of designers.

>                                         I respect and esteem Matthew
> Paul Thomas which is the only canonical designer I ever interacted
> with on the channel and I think I have zero issues with him, while I'd
> like to see him more activelly involved.
>...

Thank you. The main reason I'm not more actively involved is that when I
get home from work I try to focus on things that aren't software.

-- 
mpt