Am Samstag, 27. Oktober 2012, 21:58:38 schrieb Thomas Pfeiffer: > On Saturday 27 October 2012 18:37:56 Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > > On Saturday, October 27, 2012 10:55:37 Björn Balazs wrote: > > > We would probably need dot releases after each sprint (and hence have > > > a shippable product after each sprint) > > > > doing a proper release after each sprint will kill our productivity due to > > the amount of developer manpower we have available to us. thankfully, > > releases should not be necessary as people can simply update their tablet > > in-situ using zypper. so we can simply refresh the build repos on OBS so > > those who are participating with us can follow development. > > Agreed. We won't need proper releases with all the fuzz. That's the big plus > of having an always releasable master: When we work with users, we can just > ask them to zypper up from master without risking the loss of data / cats / > hamsters / grandmas.
Sounds good. Just one question following my reply below... > > > and we would need to implement > > > some way of talking to the users (best would probably be directly > > > through the product). > > > > do you have a concrete concept of what this might look like? > > From my perspective, ideally we'd have a group of users interested in > participation (but not necessarily programming) who we interview and do > usability tests and surveys with etc. I strongly belief in talking to the user directly through the product, e.g. asking to answer some questions, subscribe to a user mailing list,... - we can figure out what we like best. To my mind this is the only way to a least have a potential to talk to some sort of representative users. This excludes the desired target groups, which Inge was addressing. We will have to use other techniques to model the not- yet-users, e.g. we could use personas for that. So we do not loose them. But it does carry some advantages, like: - real users can report easily about real experiences (like David T. obviously feeled he wanted to that in reply to this thread, I think a lot of users (esp. the tinkerers) will have the same wish) - if such a mechanism is established we will get to know where we are in terms of the user base and our desired target group (Did the control industry hop on yet?) - people feel self efficient, because they influence the product - hence they will have a much more positive attitude towards PA and might even do some marketing and such... - if numbers are getting larger, we do not have to bother the same user all of the time again Now my question: If we do so, we would need to talk to people using a certain configuration / version of the software to get the right feedback (and people will not be able to tell us the correct version number of their software). This is where I drew the idea of dot releases from. Would this also be possible when we use the Master branch? Cheers, Björn > _______________________________________________ > Active mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/active -- Dipl.-Psych. Björn Balazs Business Management & Research T +49 30 6098548-21 | M +49 179 4541949 User Prompt GmbH | Psychologic IT Expertise Grünberger Str. 49, 10245 Berlin | www.user-prompt.com HRB 142277 | AG Berlin Charlottenburg | Geschäftsführer Björn Balazs _______________________________________________ Active mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/active
