On Wednesday 28 October 2009 10:59:52 Nicu Buculei wrote: > On 10/28/2009 11:33 AM, Martin Sourada wrote: > > I think the F12 schedule worked rather well, we slipped a few times a > > few days or a week and skipped most of the wallpaper refreshes -- I > > think it's unnecessary to have that many wallpaper refreshes. I've tried > > to keep in sync with our work the Key milestones [1] so you can compare > > what we did in time and when we did it. > > A characteristic of this cycle was we had some *very good* designs *very > early* in the process, we got complacent about them and a long period of > inactivity occurred (this is why I think we missed refreshes). > Then close to the Beta we tried a refreshed look and post-beta due to > *some* fedback, a major and unexpected refresh occurred. Indeed! I totally agree with you. So we need more feedback - probably through more refreshes for alpha, more communication out of design team. It's really too late in time after beta (that's was one problem with F12 schedules - it was bad communicated what does it mean alpha and beta for F12 - beta is now practically final release, release candidate). > > If there's a calendar instance at our sites (I remember folks were > > talking about it on infra, but don't know whether they implemented it), > > it would nice to load the schedule there -- calendar with highlights is > > faster to follow than table with dates and not everyone uses one > > himself. > > For the last few releases we have a recurrent motif: some key decision > makers stay silent for most of the development cycle and very late in > the process complain and require a complete (or at least major) > redesign. This is a serious bug in our process. > _______________________________________________ design-team mailing list design-team@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
