Re: [Ayatana] Reducing Resistance to Change

[Mario Vukelic <mario.vukelic@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 2010-04-29 at 11:35 +0200, Paolo Sammicheli wrote:
> I'm so sorry to disagree with you in this. The entire process, from my perspective, 
> worked regardless the schedule. Theme was applied the day before the UI freeze without 
> any previous discussion or even information. Then button order changed again with a 
> final statement the 1 April, nearly one month after the UI Freeze. Few days after this  
> usability bug I found in UNE (1) was marked "low" and "late to be fixed" because "we 
> passed the UI Freeze for a month now" but weeks later the envelope icon in the indicator 
> applet changed.

I totally agree and you expressed much better than I what I had intended
to be a main point in my post (the parent of the one you're disagreeing
with). 

I'm sure there are good arguments for why the UI freeze is at the point
it is (quite late in the cycle, IMHO, if there is an intent to produce,
gather, and analyze tester feedback as well as  implement/iterate
changes based on this input), but what we see on the tester side is,
using the example of Lucid as far as I can tell:
      * Three alphas without large UI changes except those introduced by
        upstream. 2.5 months from alpha 1 to alpha 3 release, during
        which communication of planned UI changes is scarce, at least it
        was in the past.
      * Two weeks after alpha 3 there is UI freeze, and large,
        potentially problematic changes land a very short time before
        the freeze. Still little official communication. Discussions
        erupt on message boards, often based on incomplete or faulty
        assumptions. (Some? Most? A vocal minority of?) users/testers up
        in arms.
      * Bugs are being filed and all too often closed because "we are
        after UI freeze". (Admittedly the discussions are exhausting for
        developers in the best of cases, more often tedious).
      * More UI changes land, which are even more jarring (window button
        placement and order). Testers who had bugs denied with the UI
        freeze argument think "WTF?". More discussions (again partly on
        wrong assumption as communication still leaves to be desired),
        more bugs opened adding to developer stress.
      * Information appears that Canonical ist just trying things out
        with the button order and placement and things may change. Also
        there are hints at "something" being planned for the top-right
        in 10.10. Users and testers largely in the dark. The tone and
        style of the communication often follows the pattern Martin
        mentioned in the OP.
      * Button order changes from max/min/close to close/min/max but
        stays on the left - we are two weeks after UI freeze. (Not sure
        whether this one actually occurred before or after beta 1)
      * Beta 1. The release notes do not even mention the window button
        change, just "new themes".
        http://www.ubuntu.com/testing/lucid/beta1
      * I seem to remember small UI changes, but not sure 
      * Beta 2, release notes do not mention window button change. You
        (Paolo) mention more changes.
      * Release. The mail to ubuntu-announce mentions "Find out what's
        new in this release with a graphical overview:
        http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/releasenotes/1004overview ", but
        there is no "graphical overview" and again no mention of the
        window button order.