ubuntu-phone team mailing list archive

[Sergio Schvezov <sergio.schvezov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On jueves 17 de julio de 2014 13h'12:51 ART, Robert Schroll wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 8:11 AM, Nathan Haines <nhaines@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 07/17/2014 05:02 AM, Oliver Propst wrote:
> > > Sure, but I think if they really want expand and create the a 
> > > similar atmosphere
> > > around it as the desktop operating system they should try to work closer
> > > with the the community.
> >
> > They can't work more closely with the community, really.
>
> Consider this bug: 
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-ui-toolkit/+bug/1276808.  Yes, 
> it's publicly available and open for comments from everyone, but 
> the description is simply a link to a private canonical.com 
> document.  That's not truly open for community participation.

That is a mistake no matter how you put it; either the bug should of been 
private or the document open. Reasons for such are varied.

> Now, I'm sure this is just a mistake -- whoever posted that to 
> the bug probably did so with the intention that everyone could 
> view it.  And since we all live logged into Google, it never 
> occurs to people who have access that other people don't.  
> However, it does imply that Canonical is making development 
> decisions in private Google documents.  So don't tell me "they 
> can't work more closely with the community"!

Decissions are always made in private before communicating; it's just more 
obvious with documents, but a private conversation over the bar, phone, 
random hall talk is no more different than this; even a ping to friend 
asking if what you are about to propose makes at least some minimal sense, 
in an extreme, even thinking about something is a private thing. What is 
important is the plan to eventually communicate about it.

> That said, I'm not convinced that this is actually a problem.  
> One of the things I like best about Ubuntu is that it is 
> developed with strong direction and vision, and doesn't merely 
> follow the majority view of the community.  It may well be that 
> that spec had to be developed in private, since it was part of 
> this directed vision.  That's fine!

I believe so too, it's all too political and doesn't just hit tech, it's a 
major thing about life in general; you surely need consensus, but not 
majority. People wouldn't be allowed to explore ideas if everything was up 
to the scrutinity of popular vote.

> So my complaint isn't that Ubuntu isn't completely 
> community-driven, it's that we keep saying it is.  Let's not.  
> Then when we get emails like Oliver's, treat it as a request to 
> alter the balance.

I still don't understand the definition of community driven. My country is 
a community and I vote for someone to represent, but they rarely do what 
"I" want, doesn't stop it from being community driven.

And those are my random thoughts :-)

Cheers
Sergio.