1 |
> On Tue, 2004-01-20 at 09:54, Paul de Vrieze wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
>> The report of yesterday's desktop-research meeting can be found at: |
4 |
>> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/desktop/research/meeting_reports.xml#doc_chap2 |
5 |
> |
6 |
> It lacks any rationale or even if what i proposed got discussed, which i |
7 |
> think is of more immediate importance than any of both currently started |
8 |
> subprojects. An IRC log would be helpful or even better a short summary. |
9 |
> |
10 |
> In the subprojects themselves i lack both rationale and any serious |
11 |
> details of how this is going to be planned. To be honest the 'graphical |
12 |
> installer' is proposed and started seven times seven times by now |
13 |
> without any significant results. And i doubt it falls under the category |
14 |
> 'desktop project', it's much broader and has actually little to do with |
15 |
> working on a desktop. On a minor note, the lead is not even member of |
16 |
> the research project (or not so on the project page) and that seems like |
17 |
> a logical requirement to me. Is it even a good idea to have a DTL lead |
18 |
> also lead a research project? DTL leads should be validating their |
19 |
> personally lead projects in the end, that's not a good thing per se. |
20 |
> Just member would probably be better. |
21 |
|
22 |
I didn't particularly want to lead the installer project, I was picking up |
23 |
the slack until someone else was interested in leading it because nobody |
24 |
stepped forward. Brandon asked to stress it at the meeting because he |
25 |
couldn't be there, I did, and I got given the responsibility. |
26 |
|
27 |
If the rest of the research people also feel that your proposal is more |
28 |
important to pursue right now and should be the second project instead of |
29 |
the installer, I have no problem with that. |
30 |
|
31 |
Donnie |
32 |
|
33 |
|
34 |
|
35 |
-- |
36 |
gentoo-desktop-research@g.o mailing list |