I would suggest aiming for a series of base hits. (: An attempt was made to hit VE out of the park. We know how well that worked.
I think a lot of the work of capturing suggestions is supposed to be done by the project manager and the engineering community liaisons. It would be interesting to have community ideas documented in a single, public, searchable, well-organized location. The project manager and community liaison could be the curators. It might be good for people who are interested in Flow to attend the Flow IRC office hours, and join in the Flow discussions on the Editor Engagement email list. Pine On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 12:38 AM, Wil Sinclair <w...@wllm.com> wrote: > > Fundamentally, I'd ask people to relax a bit regarding Flow. Nobody's > > planning to push this one out radically. Today we saw some on-wiki > > drama because a new test page was turned on. For something like the > > en.wp Teahouse, I'd want the hosts to be fully on-board before > > converting it over (and the rest of the community to not oppose it). > > If that's not doable, we can focus on other use cases first. It's > > early days and this one's a long haul -- just like VE. But we > > shouldn't shy away from a problem just because it's hard. > > I think this is one of the points some of us here are trying to make. > We *don't* want Flow to be just like VE. We want it to be a good piece > of software that is rolled out smoothly. > > There are some serious communication problems that I can already see > having a toll. Fractured discussions, issues/concerns not captured in > workflows, and many members of the community who feel like they > haven't been heard out during earlier stages of the project. We have > an opportunity to not get all wound around the axle like we have been > with MV, and that opportunity should not be thrown away. > > Quite frankly, the WMF could do a lot more to improve communications > across the community with respect to Flow. Pick one forum and redirect > discussions- even this one- to it. Right now there are a few > candidates. Make sure all the takeaways from those discussions are > captured in workflows; don't let ideas get lost in archives. Choose > one place to keep your backlog- bugzilla or trello- and stick with it. > You'll need the community's help to see what works for the different > roles everyone must play to make software that works well for its > users. But the community needs your help in organizing the highly > detailed communications with users that is always required to build > good software. > > It good to hear you say that this is a long haul, because Flow > obviously has a ways to go. But that doesn't mean it has to be a death > march to the same reception as VE or MV. Let's all be smarter this > time. Learning how to communicate better is a great place to start, > and I hope the feedback I've given here is helpful. Please let me know > if there is anything you can think of that I- or anyone else in the > broader community- can do to help you hit this one out of the park. > > ,Wil > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
