On 05/04/2012 06:10 AM, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
I'd like to propose an additional list,
unity-distilled, which would be public and unmoderated, but open by
invitation only.
Thoughts?
A list like this without the noise would be very welcome.
But a number of people would have to be on both
Hi Mark, i've subscribed since few months, sometimes I got a +1, other
times I wrote about things already decided. Anyway it was easy to me
understand when propose an idea and when jump the conversation.
I propose this way:
1) this ml for newbies, onews, oldies, old ideas: that is the primordial
so
2012/5/4 Evan Huus
>
> When designing a large, widely-used project like Unity you have to be
> brutally strict about what is allowed in terms of features and options, or
> else the project begins to bloat under the weight of hundreds of these
> 'little' features and options. It starts being slow,
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Marco Biscaro wrote:
> 2012/5/4 Evan Huus
>
>>
>> When designing a large, widely-used project like Unity you have to be
>> brutally strict about what is allowed in terms of features and options, or
>> else the project begins to bloat under the weight of hundreds of
I do understand the reasoning for dodge removal but shouldn't the usability
tests have suggested the problems in the first place?
Obviously, removing a feature that has been default for a full release is
going to have much more impact than a feature that is wanted but has never
been included or is
Isn't public and invite only a bit of a contradiction?
If the list publicly viewable but only writeable by invitation then yes, it
would be a good iead then those of us who do like to bang on about the same
old thing can still view the discussions but take our own thoughts elseware
(the "noisy" lis
Well I suppose that code does still have be maintained and taken into
account regarding other features?
On 4 May 2012 04:35, Ryan Gauger wrote:
> But I do not see how it is a burden to developers. Why not just leave it
> as it was? I just don't understand the burden part. Someone please explain
Em 04-05-2012 05:36, Thorsten Wilms escreveu:
A list like this without the noise would be very welcome.
But a number of people would have to be on both lists, then, to see
all the input and for seeing who can be invited. That's more load, not
less, for at least a selected few who are all suppo
On 03/05/12 23:59, Jo-Erlend Schinstad wrote:
> One question, though. What exactly does it mean that it'll be public,
> unmoderated and invite-only? If the goal is to enhance the debates, I
> think it's important that anyone is able to lurk and learn. I also think
> such a list should have very cle
On 04/05/12 06:41, shane lee wrote:
> Isn't public and invite only a bit of a contradiction?
> If the list publicly viewable but only writeable by invitation then
> yes, it would be a good iead then those of us who do like to bang on
> about the same old thing can still view the discussions but tak
Although I think it is a good idea there is a concern that genuine thoughts
and good ideas of those not invited and posting in the "noisy" list may
well go un-noticed and those good ideas be passed over if that list becomes
seen as the "whinging" list and stops being read at all by those in the
inv
Hi,
Well not sure if its possible on a mailing list but the same problem happens in
the forums.
So the mods in the ubuntu forums cafe, have created a sub forum called
recurring discussions.
http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=11
maybe the same can be applied to the "recurring discussi
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 10:10 PM, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
> Participation there would be predicated on a shared
> understanding of our values, goals and modus operandi.
This standard does run the risk of becoming insular and
self-reinforcing. You have to be very careful that the takeaway
message
On 4 May 2012 00:10, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
> There's lots of value in having a public, unmoderated list for design
> discussions. It's good to have a place where anybody can generate ideas.
> And this list is fine for that. I'd like to propose an additional list,
> unity-distilled, which would
Am 03.05.2012 20:20, schrieb Pedro Bessa:
Hi,
If I patch Unity to have no System Setting app icon clutter
and return System Settings for Wallpaper, Shutdown etc,
will you take a look or definitely reject?
Best regards,
Pedro Bessz
It has been discussed some times I think, I really like this id
On 04/05/12 16:39, Nadine Ledwig wrote:
Hello,
I'm highly sight impaired, and the last two years, I was used to use
ubuntu 10.4 with orca and the compiz plugins eZoom-Desktop and
negativeplugin.
Now, i installed ubuntu 12.04 on my desktop and I've some problems.
In unity-2d, dash and loun
You don't have to agree with the decisions, you just have to accept that
a decision was made even if you disagree with it, and respect the fact
that someone had to make that decision knowing that it wouldn't please
everybody, which is never easy.
Michael Hall
mhall...@ubuntu.com
On 05/04/2012 10
I think it is more about promoting constructive debate/discussion.
Who decides what is constructive and how is another matter...
On 4 May 2012 18:47, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> On 4 May 2012 00:10, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
> > There's lots of value in having a public, unmoderated list for design
> >
Hi,
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 3:09 PM, shane lee wrote:
> I think it is more about promoting constructive debate/discussion.
> Who decides what is constructive and how is another matter...
For decisions that have been made, and for which it is clear that
there's no going back, the debate is just no
19 matches
Mail list logo
