1 |
On Tuesday 28 October 2003 18:25, dams@×××.fr wrote: |
2 |
> * Discussion/planning phase |
3 |
> - throw a description here, verify validity |
4 |
> - preliminary discussion here and/or irc |
5 |
> - APPROVAL 1 : does it worth it to handle it (see below) |
6 |
> |
7 |
> * Prototype phase [no strict deadlines/roadmap, but should be not very |
8 |
> long] - Prepare a testcase or a little code snippet to let everybody play |
9 |
> with possible solution. |
10 |
> - With the help of the other insterested in (small groups or everybody) |
11 |
> let's try to get a fully working program. |
12 |
> |
13 |
I think that we need to be careful here. This "solution" should not be more |
14 |
than 2 hours of work. Other work needs to be done after the glep has been |
15 |
written and issued. |
16 |
|
17 |
> * Revision phase [strict deadline] |
18 |
> - add a new task : at least some time to research further (with a |
19 |
> milestone), and some time to find a solution (with milestone). |
20 |
> - assign people to the task, set up deadlines |
21 |
> - all this should be well written in the xml project pages. |
22 |
> - APPROVAL 2 (see below) |
23 |
> |
24 |
I think this should go together with the writing of a GLEP. This glep should |
25 |
also contain the key parts of the discussions of the discussion phase |
26 |
including problem identification (what is the problem), problem acceptation |
27 |
(is this really a problem), problem exploration (what are the causes and |
28 |
possible solutions to the problem) , proposed solution and the merrits of |
29 |
this particular solution. The latter of course from later discussions. |
30 |
|
31 |
> * Project tracking |
32 |
> - once the planning phase end with approval (see below), the thing should |
33 |
> end up to a GLEP |
34 |
> - the d-r site should host a little summary of every project with phases |
35 |
> and timings once we are in the Proto phase. |
36 |
|
37 |
I think the proto phase can better be called the problem exploration phase. |
38 |
Its purpose to refine the problem and find possible solutions. |
39 |
|
40 |
> |
41 |
> Decisions |
42 |
> --------- |
43 |
> We'll try to work together in a friendly manner, so no use to be strict for |
44 |
> every points. Nevertheless, rules are still usefull for extreme situations. |
45 |
> |
46 |
> APPROVAL 1 : at the end of the Revision phase, we should try to come to an |
47 |
> agreement that we should handle the case. |
48 |
> |
49 |
> APPROVAL 2 : I think it'd good to warn people outside of -desktop-research |
50 |
> at this point, like -desktop leader. |
51 |
> |
52 |
> |
53 |
> What do you think? |
54 |
|
55 |
I think we might need to add a few lines about the necessity to make sure that |
56 |
the solution is acceptable to the developers at large. I believe that glep |
57 |
integration is very important to that respect. |
58 |
|
59 |
> |
60 |
> As soon as we finish writing this draft, we'll put it officially on the |
61 |
> project page, and we'll be (at last) able to begin the Real Work :) |
62 |
|
63 |
certainly. |
64 |
|
65 |
Paul |
66 |
|
67 |
-- |
68 |
Paul de Vrieze |
69 |
Gentoo Developer |
70 |
Mail: pauldv@g.o |
71 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |