Diana Fong wrote:
Máirín Duffy wrote:
Diana Fong wrote:
Also word-for-word notes that I wrote for the ThemingOverview page
somehow leaked in (eg notes on testing GDM themes) and were
miscredited. Don't worry though, I've removed my contributions so you
don't have to worry about that anymore.
Looks like you missed a few.
(1) that's not the way wikis work, if you've signed the CLA you don't
need permission to make modifications and improvements to pages,
(2) the specifications you contributed yourself had errors so
obviously you're not fact and error-checking before you post things
(check the history of ReleaseGraphics) and you did not discuss your
plan with the list before going ahead and just doing it,
(3) there are others on the list perfectly capable of fact-checking
with either RH package maintainers or upstream package maintainers.
Creating and discussing theme elements and their specifications is not
that complicated. I've discussed GDM theme issues with Brian Cameron,
the upstream maintainer of GDM, and discovered our themes up to this
point have had accessibility issues we should address for FC7. This is
an open community and people aren't really that hard to get a hold of.
In (1) you say permission isn't needed and then in (2) you say i needed
to check before doing. I checked information with the people directly
involved with taking the graphics on the Desktop team for our specific
distro. Fact-checking by others is fine, but as I also follow these
specs for RHEL graphics and the last two FC releases, it would be
advantageous to check with me and our engineers as we are the people
responsible for the end product. And if, as you say in (3) is true,
that this is an open community and people aren't really that hard to get
a hold of, then it should not be a problem.
Being that this directly relates to my role within Red Hat's Desktop
Group (as I go through this process several times for RHEL releases)
I will ultimately be the one responsible for providing the team with
the necessary usable graphics. Therefore, if the creator
follows the specs I've complied on that page, I would be responsible
in seeing that it works for the engineers and any errors would not be
of the creator who had followed my recommendations.
I don't really see how that has anything to do with these wiki pages.
Ok, so you want us community folk to submit art that makes it easier
for you to prepare to hand it off to the engineers. That's cool. Why
not do this on the community-created and contributed page on the wiki
rather than creating your own bubble?
If also by submitting patches for applications you are also making it
easier for the maintainer...then yes, I want for there to be as little
incompatibility and missing images as possible when I approve the images
and hand it off to the engineers. It's no different than when
submitting source code patches to a project maintainer; there's review
and ping-pong to ensure that it fits in with the rest of the codebase.
My own bubble is comprised of the Red Hat Desktop Engineers which, like
myself, have themed several releases. All the information combined to
make ReleaseGraphics was to provide the Fedora Artists with a better
understanding of what is needed by people who do this regularly.
And so with deviations and personal comments, I take responsibility
of the content of the page with Release Graphic information separate
of all other specs that a general ThemingOverview page should
include. The page includes pieces from many people, I did not credit
nor do I take credit.
"These are the notes and specifications I've accumulated from having
completed 4-5 release designs." --Artwork/ReleaseGraphics
Precisely...notes and specifications I've accumulated from having
completed 4-5 release designs.
I give up. You've completely obfuscated my points. Thanks.
Have a Merry Christmas.
~m
_______________________________________________
Fedora-art-list mailing list
Fedora-art-list@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-art-list
