[CREATE] Libre Graphics Whatever - charter prototype
avox at arcor.de
Thu Jun 3 02:47:09 PDT 2010
> Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2010 15:14:38 +0200
> From: Gregory Pittman <gpittman at iglou.com>
> Subject: Re: [CREATE] Libre Graphics Whatever - charter prototype
> To: create at lists.freedesktop.org
> Message-ID: <4C06593E.4030404 at iglou.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> On 06/01/2010 12:36 PM, Jos? Cruz wrote:
> > Hi! I'm agree with Jon about the differents classes of membership. We
> are a
> > small company (just two persons) in the graphic design world, using
> only libre
> > software, and I think it is interesting to bring more professionals
> (wich are
> > intensive users) to FLOSS.
> In the vein of discussions about either insufficient or excessive
> "power" that might come about from various schemes of membership, we
> consider that there can be some kind of whole-cloth membership for all
> those interested as individuals, then we can have the association also
> consist inside as a number of Sections, each of which could pertain to
> subgroup, eg, artists/designers, as opposed to another section of
> developers, and others.
> The reason for suggesting this is to find a way around simply
> within the organization the same thing we have in the outside world,
> where non-programmer users complain that the developers won't listen to
> their needs/requests, and developers complain that users don't
> understand the constraints of the development process.
> This isn't to suggest that a User Section could not have within it some
> developers or that a Developer Section could not have users -- if
> nothing else, there are those who could legitimately claim both kinds
> activities, as we saw at this year's LGM. Furthermore, one might be a
> member of more than one section.
> A section of users might discuss among themselves various feature
> requests or user operability issues so that the best, most coherent
> final requests might be presented to the Developer Section and
> Developers might discuss the feedback from users and the direction
> individual projects are taking to propose improved interoperability,
> then solicit feedback from the User Section to see if these seem worth
So you propose, in order to avoid misunderstandings between users and developers, to keep them in their separate subgroups / sections? I think that goes against the purpose of what we want to achieve with LGM.
As a developer I enjoy direct contact with users when they have feature requests. It's also good to have a developer on board when discussing new features: non-programmers might ask for things which just aren't possible or - more often - ask for things that could be much simpler done if they dared to ask for it (eg. ask for a better hyphenation dialog when a direct canvas-based hyphenation tool might work even better).
> This might also enhance future LGMs by naturally leading to some
> BOF-like meetings for individual sections, so that fewer things take
> place in such an ad hoc way.
Don't over-organize BoF's; they have to fall the way the wind blows them.
Just my €.02
More information about the CREATE