In anticipation of our Wednesday Cosmo 1.0 discussion, I'm sending
this proposal out as food for thought...It's my first pass at
processing design issues and user feedback to inform 1.0 planning.
http://chandlerproject.org/Notes/OneDotZeroDesktopBugs
http://chandlerproject.org/Notes/OneDotZeroServerBugs
Caveats:
+ These lists only deal with *end-user* experience and functionality
as related to
+ Ultimately, bug and feature prioritization need to be discussed in
the context of: What are the tenets for 1.0? What is the timeframe
for 1.0?
Proposed framing:
These are all the bugs in bugzilla (minus recently logged ones) in a
prioritization framework that goes roughly like this:
1. Fix What's Broken
+ Prioritized wrt how noticeable the bug is and how bad the
consequences are
+ Round out sharp corners for first 10 minutes of using Chandler
+ Causes workflow paralysis
+ Corrupts data
+ Confusing
+ Annoying interaction issues
2. Feature Enhancements for 1.0
+ Stuff people keep asking for
+ Broken stuff that needs more design work
I was liberal with this list. I imagine that a lot more cutting will
be done. I think ultimately, new features should only make it in if:
- We think we will lose existing users if we don't have it;
- It will win us a lot of new users that we otherwise wouldn't get;
- Do-able given our timeframe in a way that doesn't create lots more
bugs.
3. Puntables: This includes both bugs and features.
+ Stuff people won't notice
+ Stuff people will forgive us for
+ Stuff we just don't have the time to do
(I imagine this list will grow.)
Thought about the framing proposal? Any bugs you think should be
higher up on the list or are missing entirely?
Mimi
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
