[Sugar-devel] Sugar UI Dictator

[Walter Bender]

On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 5:55 PM, Michael Stone <michael at laptop.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 at 09:32:53 +0000, Martin Dengler wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 12:06:56AM -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
>>>
>>> P.S. - Later [...] we discovered a confusion about the mandate of
>>> the proposed committee; to wit:
>>>
>>>  Is the main purpose of the committee to act as a UI Maintainer (e.g., by
>>>  deciding which UI-related patches to merge) or is the main purpose of
>>> the
>>>  committee to make UI-related decisions on an as-requested basis?
>>
>> I think it is both act as maintainer and make UI-related decisions.
>
> @Martin -- Choosing "both" seems like a bad idea to me because it:
>
>  a) balloons the scope of the problem to be solved,
>  b) shrinks the population of qualified participants, and
>  c) seems likely to cause turf wars.
>
> Instead, I would prefer to stay focused on the need for UI-decision-making
> that
> Bernie identified in his initial email.
>
>> It seems we're re-invented the Design Team.  I spoke with Gary Martin and
>> Bernie and, despite having lost the logs of my conversation with Gary, my
>> hazy recollection is that that they also came to this conclusion.
>
> "Re-invented" is a rather ambiguous term. If you mean "defined the scope of,
> winnowed the membership of, empowered, and sought concrete commitments
> from..."
> then perhaps we agree. If you mean something else, then perhaps you should
> be
> more explicit.
>
>> With that in mind, I think we should just have more people actively
>> participate in the design team.  I'm interested, so have put my name
>> down on http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Design_Team/Contacts#Team_Members
>> I hope anyone else interested in being active, will do the same.
>> Michael Stone, Bernie Innocenti, I'm looking at you.
>>
>> Gary, can you add / correct anything from our conversation?
>>
>> Michael, is there anything I've misunderstood/misremembered about your
>> proposal?  Would you want the Design Team to adopt your "what does the
>> committee do"[1] responsibilities?
>
> I care about the substance, not the name: the UI committee that I'm
> describing
> has a fixed membership, offers a service-level agreement, and is answerable
> to
> the Oversight Board. In short, it is *designed* to meet Bernie's need for
> competent, respected, decisive, and dependable UI decision-making.  Does the
> Design Team that you, Gary, and Bernie are thinking of share these
> properties?
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 at 08:42:42 -0500, Walter Bender wrote:
>>
>> I mostly kind of agree with this.
>
> @Walter -- I'm not sure what "this" refers to.

Martin's post that was directly above my comment.
>
>> But adding a bunch of developers to the design team will not help it
>> accomplish its design goals.
>
> Two comments:
>
>  1. I don't see "a bunch of developers"; I see specific people (Gary,
> Martin,
>     Eben, Christian, Bernie, ...) with specific talents, predispositions,
> and
>     availabilities.

Even on your short list, I see people who are not designers... there
is a call to add more non-designers. Names are accumulating on
http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Design_Team/Contacts

>  2. Of the available choices, who would you be most comfortable empowering?

The people on the list who have demonstrated that they have a deep
understanding of the design goals of Sugar and who have the time to
make a sustained commitment to this task. Probably that would be Gary,
Martin, and me at this point.

>
>> We need more designers involved.
>
> What is your plan for getting them involved?

I've been trying to recruit at universities. But also, I think great
design attracts great designers. Another reason to keep our standards
high.
>
> (My plan, such as it is, is:
>
>  a) to make a place where they will want to come and

Not sure how any suggestions in the above thread does that, but I may
have overlooked something.

>
>  b) to develop the pre-existing skills and sensibilities of the people we
>     already have)

No argument from me except that I don't want to divert non-designers
into making design decisions, which seems to have been the direction
we were heading.

>
>> And we need to stay focused on Sugar's core design principles. One thing I
>> do
>> remember from your IRC discussion with Gary (I was on the edge of the
>> conversation) is the need to bring the HIG up to date. While this may be
>> considered tactical, I think it is strategic, in that sets the tone for
>> all
>> further actions. (For the same reason, I have been advocating for an
>> architectural document from the Engineering perspective.)
>
> First, I completely agree with you that these are important tasks.
> However, I don't see anyone willing to work on them at this time.
>
> Do you?

No. But I am also actively recruiting in this area and trying to
remove distractions from some people whom I think could contribute to
this area.

> If so, who did I miss?
> If not, why is no one willing to do the work that many people agree is
> important?

I think it is easy to get sucked into the world of day-to-day
maintenance at the expense of long-term planning. At least easy for
me.

>
> Might they be unwilling because they don't see how the work can be completed
> successfully in the prevailing organizational conditions?

Perhaps. That certainly seems to be your perspective and you are one
of the people whose skills I would want to tap into.

>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 at 09:38:57 -0500, Barbara Barry wrote:
>>
>> As an advocate for Sugar in the field in my work, I'm chiming in to
>> support
>> Walter's point.
>>
>> What might help Sugar is a designer who can articulate a strong design
>> point
>> of view by understanding the needs of the users and translating them,
>> guided
>> by the Sugar core design principles, into a plan for development.
>>
>> Design is not a set of isolated decisions about what features to add or
>> take
>> away but how to move consistently toward a goal, in Sugar's case an OS and
>> computing environment that can help children as they learn.
>>
>> Designers have particular skills that are not obvious. Good ones are
>> masters
>> at modeling the needs of users in astonishing detail and accuracy, and it
>> is
>> their job to negotiate the terrain between the stated design goals of an
>> organization, the user experience, and the implementation by developers.
>>
>> It's not only Apple that has a distinct design point of view but really
>> any
>> company that makes a product that works and grows.  So Bernie, I think
>> what
>> you were asking for is not a Dictator, who suggests, approves or denies
>> features, but someone to lead by articulating the user model and helping
>> the
>> community develop it in a coordinated effort.
>
> @Barbara -- this is a really nice description both of what design is and of
> the
> most positive aspects of life in 2006-2008 when OLPC and its partners were
> really driving the evolution of Sugar.
> In some ways, I too would like to return to those times.
> However, both for better and for worse, it looks to me like we're now stuck
> in
> a world in which
>  * we can each give only a few hours per month,   * there is no central
> authority around which to organize effort,   * we meet face-to-face for only
> a few hours per year
>
> and in which many harsh words have been exchanged. (Including some by me.
> :()
>
> Consequently, it also seems to me that we're not really presently capable of
> achieving the kind of coordination you're describing...
>
> ..and worse, that we're only going to make things worse if we keep
> pretending
> otherwise.
> Fortunately, though, we can still work on baby steps [1]. :)
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Michael
>
> [1]: Anyone else remember the "lava pit" and "duo-sit" coordination games
> [2]
> of ages past? I'm searching for their moral equivalents here.
>
> [2]: http://www.commonaction.org/gamesguide.pdf, p. 11, 14
>

-walter

-- 
Walter Bender
Sugar Labs
http://www.sugarlabs.org