2011/7/22 Andrew Rist <[email protected]>
> I think we need an approach for issues like the icon set that allow > developers to produce, > and the community to review, alternate sets of resources. It would be good > to agree > on a common set of design criteria (e.g. color differentiation, accessible, > highlight ODF, etc). > The process should allow for multiple options to be developed *before* the > choice of a new default. > > I think this is different from the standard process of CTR, but in the case > of RTC it would be nice to > have the evolution of multiple sets of resources in the svn history. I'm > wondering how we do > this within the Apache way. > Indeed, I'm wondering the same thing too, because I'm new to the Apache way of work and I'm still learning. In the older OOo community, the work was project-centric, where a need grew in a specific project and then it was satisfied from professional developers or volunteers with suitable skills, while trying to have a larger consensus in the community. Here, the whole process is more SVN-centric and there is, at least so far, a lot less specialization through sub-projects and so on. So, the main question I have is: is a broad consensus on this list "to change the icon set" enough in order to put that task on Apache OOo to-do list for the future, at least as a starting point? In fact, this simple change involves a lot of collateral tasks and duties: 1) a creation of a design development process (as you correctly stated); 2) a creation of an Apache OOo brand identity (legal stuff for a logo/color schema?); 3) "Foreign affairs" for external collaborations (with the ODF group, for example). Regards, Gianluca -- Lettura gratuita o acquisto di libri e racconti di fantascienza, fantasy, horror, noir, narrativa fantastica e tradizionale: http://www.letturefantastiche.com/
