Hi everyone, Attached is the draft PRD for the Workstation working group. The proposal tries to be relatively high level and focus on goals and principles, but I have included some concrete examples at times to try to provide some clarity on how the goals and principles could play out in practice.
I hope the community at large will take the time to read through it and provide feedback so that when the working group meet next we can use that feedback to start tuning in on the final form of the PRD.
Also in the name of openness, before I sent this here, I showed the PRD draft to key stakeholders and decision makers inside Red Hat, to ensure that we have the necessary support for these plans to get the kind of engineering resources allocated from Red Hat we will need to pull this off.
Sincerely, Christian F.K. Schaller
P.S. I am celebrating both our wedding anniversary and my wifes birthday this weekend so I will not be able to be online a lot. That said I will make the time to go online to check my email from time to time so that I can respond to any questions that has come in, just don't expect immediate answers from me this weekend :)
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller cschalle@redhat.com wrote:
Hi everyone, Attached is the draft PRD for the Workstation working group. The proposal tries to be relatively high level and focus on goals and principles, but I have included some concrete examples at times to try to provide some clarity on how the goals and principles could play out in practice.
I hope the community at large will take the time to read through it and provide feedback so that when the working group meet next we can use that feedback to start tuning in on the final form of the PRD.
Thanks. I'll take some time this weekend to read this over.
josh
Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller (cschalle@redhat.com) said:
Hi everyone, Attached is the draft PRD for the Workstation working group. The proposal tries to be relatively high level and focus on goals and principles, but I have included some concrete examples at times to try to provide some clarity on how the goals and principles could play out in practice.
I hope the community at large will take the time to read through it and provide feedback so that when the working group meet next we can use that feedback to start tuning in on the final form of the PRD.
Also in the name of openness, before I sent this here, I showed the PRD draft to key stakeholders and decision makers inside Red Hat, to ensure that we have the necessary support for these plans to get the kind of engineering resources allocated from Red Hat we will need to pull this off.
Something that doesn't seem specified here is any sort of a design style or guide for how apps used in the Workstation should generally be built and function. Is there intended to be that sort of standard?
Bill
On Fri 01 Nov 2013 14:43:37 EDT, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller (cschalle@redhat.com) said:
Hi everyone, Attached is the draft PRD for the Workstation working group. The proposal tries to be relatively high level and focus on goals and principles, but I have included some concrete examples at times to try to provide some clarity on how the goals and principles could play out in practice.
I hope the community at large will take the time to read through it and provide feedback so that when the working group meet next we can use that feedback to start tuning in on the final form of the PRD.
Also in the name of openness, before I sent this here, I showed the PRD draft to key stakeholders and decision makers inside Red Hat, to ensure that we have the necessary support for these plans to get the kind of engineering resources allocated from Red Hat we will need to pull this off.
Something that doesn't seem specified here is any sort of a design style or guide for how apps used in the Workstation should generally be built and function. Is there intended to be that sort of standard?
Bill
The opening sentence is great, it provides a concise statement of intent:
"The Fedora Workstation working group aims to create a reliable, user-friendly and powerful operating system for laptops and PC hardware."
All the plans and goals under this should have a clear defined goal of how it contributes back to the main statement of intent.
However, should the document also define what some of the terms in that statement actually mean? How do we define "reliable", "user-friendly" and "powerful" (and even "laptops" and "PC hardware") in relation to the Fedora Workstation.
--ryanlerch
Hi Bill, It is a good question. It does seem a bit more detailed than the level I tried to put this document on, so maybe should a style guide would be part of second stage working group output. But what probably would belong in this document would be a paragraph saying we intend to come up with such a sub-document.
Christian
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Nottingham" notting@redhat.com To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Cc: desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org Sent: Friday, November 1, 2013 2:43:37 PM Subject: Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation
Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller (cschalle@redhat.com) said:
Hi everyone, Attached is the draft PRD for the Workstation working group. The proposal tries to be relatively high level and focus on goals and principles, but I have included some concrete examples at times to try to provide some clarity on how the goals and principles could play out in practice.
I hope the community at large will take the time to read through it and provide feedback so that when the working group meet next we can use that feedback to start tuning in on the final form of the PRD.
Also in the name of openness, before I sent this here, I showed the PRD draft to key stakeholders and decision makers inside Red Hat, to ensure that we have the necessary support for these plans to get the kind of engineering resources allocated from Red Hat we will need to pull this off.
Something that doesn't seem specified here is any sort of a design style or guide for how apps used in the Workstation should generally be built and function. Is there intended to be that sort of standard?
Bill
On 01/11/13 10:24, Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller wrote:
Hi everyone, Attached is the draft PRD for the Workstation working group. The proposal tries to be relatively high level and focus on goals and principles, but I have included some concrete examples at times to try to provide some clarity on how the goals and principles could play out in practice.
I hope the community at large will take the time to read through it and provide feedback so that when the working group meet next we can use that feedback to start tuning in on the final form of the PRD.
Also in the name of openness, before I sent this here, I showed the PRD draft to key stakeholders and decision makers inside Red Hat, to ensure that we have the necessary support for these plans to get the kind of engineering resources allocated from Red Hat we will need to pull this off.
Sincerely, Christian F.K. Schaller
P.S. I am celebrating both our wedding anniversary and my wifes birthday this weekend so I will not be able to be online a lot. That said I will make the time to go online to check my email from time to time so that I can respond to any questions that has come in, just don't expect immediate answers from me this weekend :)
Although i am not sure if the PRD is the place for it, But should we also think about conducting some user surveys to help define our target audience further? Also, some User testing on what we have already would also be useful for a baseline to check against in the future when we start implementing changes.
cheers, ryanlerch
Hi Ryan, I been discussing the possibilities of doing some surveys with Langdon White, so hopefully yes. We just need to rustle up the budget first :)
Christian
----- Original Message ----- From: "Ryan Lerch" rlerch@redhat.com To: "Discussions about development for the Fedora desktop" desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org, devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Sent: Monday, November 4, 2013 11:14:21 AM Subject: Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation
On 01/11/13 10:24, Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller wrote:
Hi everyone, Attached is the draft PRD for the Workstation working group. The proposal tries to be relatively high level and focus on goals and principles, but I have included some concrete examples at times to try to provide some clarity on how the goals and principles could play out in practice.
I hope the community at large will take the time to read through it and provide feedback so that when the working group meet next we can use that feedback to start tuning in on the final form of the PRD.
Also in the name of openness, before I sent this here, I showed the PRD draft to key stakeholders and decision makers inside Red Hat, to ensure that we have the necessary support for these plans to get the kind of engineering resources allocated from Red Hat we will need to pull this off.
Sincerely, Christian F.K. Schaller
P.S. I am celebrating both our wedding anniversary and my wifes birthday this weekend so I will not be able to be online a lot. That said I will make the time to go online to check my email from time to time so that I can respond to any questions that has come in, just don't expect immediate answers from me this weekend :)
Although i am not sure if the PRD is the place for it, But should we also think about conducting some user surveys to help define our target audience further? Also, some User testing on what we have already would also be useful for a baseline to check against in the future when we start implementing changes.
cheers, ryanlerch
On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 10:24:20AM -0400, Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller wrote:
Hi everyone, Attached is the draft PRD for the Workstation working group. The proposal tries to be relatively high level and focus on goals and principles, but I have included some concrete examples at times to try to provide some clarity on how the goals and principles could play out in practice.
I hope the community at large will take the time to read through it and provide feedback so that when the working group meet next we can use that feedback to start tuning in on the final form of the PRD.
Here's a statement we may need to better clarify on p. 3:
"The working group will also specify policies in terms of branding, themeing and desktop graphics."
I think we should be clear that any branding efforts need to fit into the overall branding framework of Fedora. We should be careful to avoid having branding diverge between the products to an extent that makes it harder for us to identify them as part of a family of Fedora products.
In my time as an FPL, I worked extensively with Fedora folks on trademark and brand guidelines. I suspect Robyn has done quite the same wherever possible. It would be a step backward to make it harder for people to readily identify any of the Fedora products with Fedora.
This is really a suggestion for all the working groups, so I'm cc'ing server@ and cloud@ lists too.
desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Bill Nottingham -
Christian Schaller -
Josh Boyer -
Paul W. Frields -
Ryan Lerch