[Pydotorg-redesign] What are the goals?

[Steve Holden]

[Aahz]
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2003, Dylan Reinhardt wrote:
> > On Tue, 2003-09-23 at 17:12, Aahz wrote:
> >> On Tue, Sep 23, 2003, Steve Holden wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Like nothing will continue to happen. We don't need
> visions, we need
> >>> direction, hence my (attempted) focus on goals.
> >>
> >> How do you suggest we set goals, then?
> >
> > Jumping in here, our essential problem is we *lack* the
> ability to set
> > goals.  As a consequence, we discuss goals in an
> decision-making vacuum,
> > which remains amusing for only a few weeks at a time.
>
> There's a difference IMO between discussing goals versus clearly
> articulating sets of suggested goals then presenting them to a
> decision-making body.  The latter is what I'm suggesting that
> subgroups
> of this list do.  From my POV, a completely articulated -- but
> summarized -- set of goals equates to "vision statement".
>
Unfortunately, as I suspect my "goal setting" email proved, if there's
no clear feedback from the PWC the discussions on goals will be as
fruitless as the discussions on redesign. I think we have a different
idea of a "vision statement", though.

A vision statement is something like "to be the primary source of
information about the use and development of the Python language", which
is neither simple nor measurable (without a research project), may or
may not be achievable and realistic, and definitely doesn't include a
timescale. SO it has few of the characteristics of a goal, or a set of
goals.

> Nevertheless, I've gone ahead and forwarded AMK's message to the PWC,
> asking whether anyone there thinks that the PWC should be a driver.
>
If the PWC won't set goals the redesign "project" is probably just going
to carry on spinning its wheels.

> > The way things stand, interested parties are encouraged to
> gather what
> > information they can and put together a proposal that is
> evaluated in a
> > PEP-like process.  That sounds nice, but doesn't show very much
> > awareness of how much effort goes into a non-trivial design
> proposal.
>
> That's exactly what I'm trying to get around.  Once we have a set of
> approved design goals, it should be easier both to create
> designs and to
> evaluate proposed designs.
>
Yes! Yes! Goals! Measurability!

> > Precious few pieces of effective communications are developed by
> > committee in an open, collaborative process.  A small group
> (1-4 people)
> > is going to need to go off and create something.  This is
> only likely to
> > happen if the powers that be are *involved* and demonstrate a high
> > degree of predisposition toward taking this group's output
> seriously.
> >
> > To move forward, we will have to identify and/or delegate
> > decision-making authority.  That authority will need to be
> *involved* in
> > the redesign process.  I don't see a lot of other ways to succeed.
>
> While I don't disagree with you, I think that there are a lot of
> different ways to be involved.

Indeed there are, and I respect all the individuals involved in this
effort. Together they could be an incredibly powerful team. I just want
to see a clear sense of direction and some goals so that I can decide
whether I have the skills and knowledge to help the group achieve what
it wants to.

So far we don't appear to have got beyond the "motherhood and apple pie"
stage, and while a lot of effort has gone into certain aspects of the
design there hasn't been any clear statement of either the vision for
the site or the goals we have to meet to achieve that vision.

regards
--
Steve Holden                                 http://www.holdenweb.com/
Python Web Programming                http://pydish.holdenweb.com/pwp/
Interview with GvR August 14, 2003       http://www.onlamp.com/python/