My assumption was that they where focus points for a set time period. A sort of "lets do this!" kind of thing where the "lets" and "this" was varying in style and format.
Sure some kinda slipped under the radar, but for the vast majority its just not possible to invest the time needed to make a proper blip. That said, what would be amazingly interesting would be some kind of report of how the people who held the task felt it went, what we can learn from each others projects and tasks, and see what can be taken from them. I mean what we know is that reporting, as in a constant recurring blog has worked wonders for Nate's Polish & Improve task - perhaps we could look at how we can improve the reporting of these tasks in general to mimic that success? Could this be a task in itself? Like a low-level task for people who want to contribute but have little time? Like "Talk to Devs and others in the task and then write a blog post each/each other week"? It doesn't take a lot of deep technical skill, requires some good communication and connection with devs etc but beyond that - hammer out some words, some screenshots if needed? /Jens On fredag 23 augusti 2019 kl. 11:45:49 CEST Adriaan de Groot wrote: > On Friday, 23 August 2019 09:13:11 CEST Kai Uwe Broulik wrote: > > > Sorry, these all are... Irrelevant, incomprehensible, ineligible or > > > inconsiderable. > > > > Care to explain why you think that is? > > (Not intending to put words in Boud's mouth here, and trying not to opine on > any specific goal-proposal) > > Well, there are 11 "goals", which vary greatly in detail, scope, and > internal consistency. The original three goals were relatively high-level; > it's possible to find a spot for yourself in working towards the goal, > regardless of your specific skill-set. Some of the new proposals are .. > well, suitable if you're a specific kind of technical programmer but very > difficult to get behind if you're not in that specific class. > > At least one proposal is such a "do all the things" grab-bag that it's hard > to figure out what the propsal actually **wants**. > > Of the 11 proposals, I found four I would call "goals" at a level of > abstraction suitable for putting to the global community, a handful that are > cool sub-projects, and a couple of "lol wut"s. > > So I voted (once, although I got two invites to the same KDE address) by > shuffling things mostly by "this isn't a viable goal" at the bottom. > > > > Besides, the previous set of goals has not been achieved by a country > > > mile. > > > > Ignoring the fact that this isn't a SI unit, this is just not true. > > No, no, Country Mile is a beer store in New Hampshire, USA. The proprietor > of the store has not achieved the KDE goals. That's understandable, maybe > we should have reached out to them. > > > > This does underscore a philosophical question: the goals were set and voted > into existence on the understanding that we (grand we, the KDE community) > would work towards those goals for a few years. I don't think there was a > "until the goals are achieved" implied; and neither does the end-of-term of > a goal imply that it is achieved or not-to-be-worked-on-anymore. > > FWIW, there are **new** goal proposals which can all be seen as spiritual > successors to the original three goals. So for the "not achieved and we need > to keep on towards the original ones" vote, there **are** selections that > can be made. > > [ade]