On Fri, 15 Aug 2014, at 09:47, svetlana wrote: > On Thu, 14 Aug 2014, at 23:35, David Gerard wrote: > > On 14 August 2014 13:56, David Cuenca <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > It would be more sensible to let contributors participate in the tech > > > roadmap in more formal and empowered way than now, because without that > > > early participation there is no possibility for later consensus. > > > > > > A pattern we see over and over is that the developers talk at length > > about what they're working on in several venues, then it's released > > and people claiming to speak for the community claim they were not > > adequately consulted. Pretty much no matter what steps were taken to > > do so, and what new steps are taken to do so. Because there's always > > someone who claims their own lack of interest is someone else's fault. > > > > > > - d. > > How could presence of interest help people to fix media viewer? > From its early beta testing, I wrote numerous feedback about how going > fullscreen is a misleading redundant step.
confusing wording; i mean: they still coded it to go fullscreen nomatter what i wanted them to have a dialog of sorts instead > It was not implemented. > What more interest could I have? > > It's not like I care about this too much, but I'm curious as to what you > expect me to be able to do to display my "interest". > > svetlana _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
