Kubuntu Product Backlog

[Patrick Dickey]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Does anyone else feel like we're getting so wrapped up in the individual
trees here, that we're ignoring the forest in front of us?

Allow me to explain, please (as my analogies tend to not make sense at
first)...

The "forest" here is the idea of a TODO list that is a big-picture view
of where Kubuntu needs/wants to go, along side the current TODO lists,
which are little-pictures of things that need to be done for the next
release.

The "trees" here is who is in charge of the Product.  I've seen numerous
posts on this subject over the past three days.  All of them (with the
exception of the clarification of where the page should be located on
the wiki site) have focused on who's in charge. None have weighed the
merits or foolishness of the idea presented.

Personally I think it's a good idea, FWIW.  The TODO list for the next
release (the 'little-picture') should be generally aimed at
incorporating the overall TODO list's objectives--and specifically aimed
at meeting the required objectives of the next release (which for the
most part is staying in line with what Ubuntu is doing).

Kind of like an American Football game of sorts (another strange
analogy).  The goal is to get to the end-zone (in this case, the overall
vision of Kubuntu), but you have to stay in-bounds in order to get
there.  You can't run behind the bleachers and come back out at the
end-zone.  Likewise, we can't just reshape Kubuntu to meet the overall
vision, we have to stay within the boundaries set up by Ubuntu.

If you sit and debate about who should be listed as in charge, you're
running around in a circle--and Ubuntu and everything else is going to
leave you behind.  Weigh the merits of the idea, and either implement
it, or revise it to become beneficial.  In the end, it doesn't matter if
one name or a million names are on the "Person In Charge" list.  That's
a minor thing that can be rewritten by anyone.

Sorry for the long-winded post (as they tend to be), and I realize that
I'm not a developer or a council member, so if I'm on the wrong track
(or I missed it where you're actually weighing or implementing the
idea), please ignore my mini-rant.

Have a great day:)
Patrick.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkzMPawACgkQMp6rvjb3CASZQACfVxJn3vcV0jENCjINaj83D+rX
tnoAoK81vb93FH9xz6rQ8+jajTAlCGi3
=8t5S
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----