Hi Folks, I'd like to back up a bit on the conversation Katie started: http://lists.osafoundation.org/archives/chandler-dev/200709.mbox/ajax/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phillip framed the big question we need to answer as (this is obviously a simplification) choosing whether we as an organization want much more complete automated test coverage: http://lists.osafoundation.org/archives/chandler-dev/200709.mbox/ajax/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Phillip may well be right that this question is the crux (whether we choose it or not) of our post-Preview plan. But I suspect we need wider discussion on less focused questions before we can answer that question to all developer's satisfaction. We know that our highest priority is "get lots of happy users". Katie laid out a lot of different areas in the Desktop app that some or all of us would like to improve. The big question that I think she was asking was, "How should we prioritize developer time in the coming months?" The conversation so far has focused, broadly, on architecture and how architecture choices might impact our ability to fix/improve/add features in response to user feedback. I'm not sure that that's the only axis where hard prioritization decisions need to be made, but lets stick with it since that's where the discussion energy is right now. If we're looking for wide developer buy-in about our post-Preview direction (I'd certainly like to see that), I think we need to get a handle on what excitement and concerns are out there about the existing architecture. Second guessing past decisions is unlikely to be fruitful, I'm not interested in recriminations, but I'm not sure we're all on the same page about whether the existing architecture is problematic. Is there frustration? How bad is that frustration? Where is it focused? Sincerely, Jeffrey _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-dev
