unity-design team mailing list archive

[Jim Rorie <jfrorie@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 2009-10-21 at 13:02 +0100, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:

> Sometimes folks actually want to push their own ideas, and think
> that's collaboration. That's not going to work here, because we have a
> core driver already.

There is a difference between push and contribute.  It's typically in
the eye of the beholder.  If you don't agree with it, then it's pushing.


> 
> There is lots to be done around that core, and this list is one way
> people can participate in that.
> 
> > There are people who will give up their personal visions
> > for yours without lots of hard data, but most of those are called
> > employees...
> >   
> Not really. Employees aren't serfs. But it's true that we have more
> opportunity to reach a common understanding in areas where we have
> higher-bandwidth interaction.

And they also understand that truly rocking the boat is not in their
long term career interests.  They wont hold their ground even if they
think you are dead wrong.  Or you might not hire them.  Same result.

Group Think...  It causes wars and bank failures.


> 
> > > We found this with Ubuntu itself - we reduced the default application
> > > install set to a single app for each major function
> > >     
> > 
> > The key here is 'distribution default'. I will congratulate you on the
> > decision to prevent choice paralysis in normal users, insisting upon a
> > single application per function at distribution time is the right
> > choice. But this is development, this is upstream, that logic may not be
> > relevant.
>
> Ah, right, the old "WE are above the default, WE are smarter, WE can
> have it any way we want". Sure you can. Just not here ;-)

You have a default, but you provide options.  Example:  Empathy is now
the default.  That's fine for most people, but you have one serious
regression. The IRC crowd.  IRC handling is scandalously bad, admitted
by the empathy folks themselves.  Who does this effect? US. The power
users that take time out of our busy schedule to participate in
something that is important to us.  

HOWEVER, I can still load Pidgin and I run both.  Pidgin for IRC and
Empathy for most everything else.  Do I expect that in the default
install.  No.  But I can adapt.  Give me an option and I will be happy.



> > I notice that you don't insist upon one application per
> > function available in the repositories or launchpad PPAs.
> >   
> Of course not. Nor would I resist there being many branches of
> notify-osd. But I will resist calls for "this should be an option".

And if notify-osd branches fifty times because Canonical has a iron
fisted vision, then you've caused the community to waste resources on a
problem that had a simple fix.

> I've done it before on this list, and will do it again, because it's a
> common meme in open source. Creating an option is a way of avoiding
> social tension - "we don't have to either agree or consent, we can
> just create an option". It's a figleaf for a failure either to reach
> consensus or to accept that someone may take a decision that has
> detractors.
> Of course, that's not ALWAYS true. But it is generally the case, and
> in this case it REALLY is the case.

Compromise is a valid path, and in politics it avoids or ends wars.  The
point that needs to be discussed is how to provide options without
destroying your vision of the desktop.  There are solutions.


> > > One of the great failings of the community approach is that it
> > > attracts folks who like to customise the environment to the point
> > > where it is "perfect for them", at which point they stop caring about
> > > the environment that the typical user sees.
> > >     
> > 
> > Why is the consumer grade user more important to design development than
> > creative experimental people? This fight against the creative ecosystem
> > can only be destructive.
> Why is this a fight against creative, experimental people? There is
> still lots of room for experimentation and creativity. But we will not
> ship an obtuse, anything goes, highly configurable experience.

No one is arguing for that.  But design with an iron fist is what mac
and MS do.  It's part of what drove us to Linux to begin with.

Is a gconf entry override for the position such a heinous perversion of
the Ayatana vision?  The ordinary user will never be affected.  Isn't
the power user part of the Ayatana vision?


> > I believe it will drive people away, hurt
> > upstreams, a number of side streams and limited sections of downstream.
> >   
> What does that mean exactly? I think you're mouthing off because you
> don't like the idea of having to go with something you don't
> personally like occasionally.

Martin is looking at the big picture.  He's concerned that you are going
down a path that will cause a fork or general disruption.  I agree.
Linux is at a fragile state.  It is posed to make a significant mark in
the desktop/portable market in the next couple of years.  This kind of
derailment could destroy the momentum.


> 
> > But I have no data on that, that's just from my own principles of
> > inclusion and experience in trying to do the hard job of bringing
> > together conflicting ideas.
> >   
> If you have deep experience of that you'll understand what I mean when
> I say you cannot always include everybody if you want a decisive and
> exciting result. You can aim to include everyone if you are
> comfortable taking a very long time to produce something that is hard
> to use and ultimately not exciting.

But if you refuse to offer any customization, you tick off the very
people you need to survive.


> > > In Ayatana, we'll take an opinionated stance, and we'll apply some
> > > common principles to the design process,
> > >     
> > 
> > This principle isn't common,
> This willingness to be decisive isn't common, no. By common principles
> I meant that we will focus on specific areas of the experience, bring 
> some specific principles to bear, and live with the results.

"Live with the results"  This really scares me.  I've looked forward to
your guidance to the community with regard to big picture concepts like
cadence and collaboration.  

This statement looks like your account has been hijacked and you're in
Hawaii. =0

> Whether or not non-computer-specialist people continue to embrace and
> enjoy Ubuntu. And whether computer specialists continue to do the
> same.

It's the second group that you are in danger of alienating. :/


> > > I have no interest whatsoever in making it possible for anybody to
> > > have any environment they want - we already have that.
> > >     
> > 
> > Hmm, I can't actually believe you would say that. It sounds so,
> > authoritarian. To dictate what is in the best interest of the masses and
> > removing the choices of those who aren't believers in the one true
> > vision.
> > 
> > It certainly doesn't sound like "I am because of my community", it
> > sounds like "I am because of what Mark likes to see". Scary in a way.
> >   
> Take a good look at Ubuntu. We find the best people and empower them
> to take hard decisions. That's how we got Upstart. It's how we got One
> CD. It's how we got most of the really great things about the
> community, including functional forums and IRC, and polite mailing
> lists.

Because all those things are common sense.  Upstart was the obvious
path. Functional forums required commitment and resources. Polite
mailing lists are results of guidelines and majority consensus.  You
decided to kick out the idiots that didn't agree with your vision of
civilized communication.

Does that now apply to desktop? :(


> 
> Don't think that Ubuntu is built on equality of the producers. It is
> not. It's built on empowering the best people to lead and take
> decisions.

And a huge amount of community support.  The human resources around
Debian and Ubuntu dwarf any capital investments thus far.  

Remember that you stand on the shoulders of giants. And they are fickle.

> 
> You don't have to look very far to find projects with similar goals to
> Ubuntu that don't have the guts or the willpower to take the same
> approach. You can see for yourself the consequences - paralysis,
> indecisiveness, slowness, complexity.
> 
> If you're reacting to the fact that right now I'm a driving force in
> this, understand that the role will shift onto the shoulders of others
> as that capability in Ubuntu and Canonical matures. It's been that way
> with many things.

I don't think that anyone has a problem with you.  You've made
tremendous contributions to the Linux desktop.

BTW, I could care less about the position of the box.  This problem is
bigger picture.

We see a dark path.  We see you walking down it.  You don't seem to see
it even with your experience in open source.  It's contradictory and
disturbing.

Jim

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature