App launcher and demo apps preview: name

Agustin Benito Bethencourt agustin.benito at codethink.co.uk
Mon Oct 10 09:48:19 EDT 2016


Hi,

On 10/10/16 14:37, Steve Crumb wrote:
> Agustin, Gunnar,
>
> First of all, thank you both for your thoughtful consideration of the naming of this upcoming "thing" (release of an image containing the new UI and app launcher).  I think your arguments for/against various names represent the exact challenge we face ( and likely will face in the future) when a significant feature is added late in the cycle.  In other words, we need to figure out how to do this now as it is likely to occur again in the future.
>
> Marketing spent significant time last week drafting GDP communication materials and presentations for the AMM.  We had to make a call and decided to use RC3 as the placeholder for this image to be released around the AMM.
>
> Instead of talking through 3-4 options, let's argue the RC3 name.  I need to be convinced that it's not our best option.  The "more stable" discussion below is one such argument that I think can be overcome through better communication (release notes, etc.).  In fact, in our communication about an RC3, we can use the fact the RC2 is the "last stable release candidate" and that RC3 includes an important, new feature "on top of" this stable release, that makes the general deliverable less stable for the moment, until additional community testing can be completed.
>
> I have a deadline of late today US time to make this decision (for printing purposes).  Can we continue this thread for the remaining time of the business day CET and get to a conclusion?

I would somehow clarify that on the final release GENIVI will publish 
ports to all the targets included in RC2.

Wifi support for RPi3 landed in Master a few days ago so we will include it.

When is the expected release day?


>
> Thanks,
> Steve
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andersson, Gunnar [mailto:gunnar.x.andersson at volvocars.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 10, 2016 6:12 AM
> To: Agustin Benito Bethencourt; Steve Crumb
> Cc: genivi-projects at lists.genivi.org; Mike Nunnery
> Subject: RE: App launcher and demo apps preview: name
>
> Agustin,
>
>> From: ... On Behalf Of Agustin Benito Bethencourt
>> Sent: den 10 oktober 2016 12:23
>> To: Steve Crumb
>> Cc: genivi-projects at lists.genivi.org; Mike Nunnery
>> Subject: App launcher and demo apps preview: name
>>
>> Hi Steve,
>>
>> during the last GDP call you mentioned that GENIVI marketing is
>> discussing how to name the image to be shown at the 15th AMM.
>>
>> For those who has not been closely following the GDP project lately,
>> the image we are preparing for the 15th AMM is:
>> * GDP11 RC2 as base + a few updates
>> * New app launcher
>> * New demo apps
>> * RPi3 image
>>
>> ++ GDP 11 RC3
>>
>> GDP consumers and contributors would expect that RC3 would be more
>> stable than RC2, which is not the case.
>
> Would it not be more accurate to say it is not *guaranteed* to be the case (because of less testing)?
>
>>
>> They would also expect to have at least the same number of tested
>> ports to targets than RC2, which is not the case either.
>
> Even if you were right that there is an expectation. that's doesn't mean every single expectation can always be met.  Find a way through!
> What's preventing us from providing additional targets later on, also named
> RC3 (because they have the same content)?  That is just adjusting the release timeline to support one target first, and then more a little later.
>
> Or even, to deliver those hardware targets with whatever becomes GDP 11 final?
>
>>
>> So I do not recommend to label this image as RC3
>>
>> ++ GDP 11 beta 2
>>
>> Adding the label beta would better reflect the current state of the
>> new features, but it would break the current release sequence which
>> will confuse consumers and would make our documentation around our
>> release inconsistent.
>
> Although you have known that this was coming for a long time and that a strategy needs to be created to meet the communication challenge (which we should not exaggerate though, in my opinion).
>
>>
>> Moving back from RC2 to Beta 2 is not considered a good practice.
>
> In my opinion RC3 is better than Beta 2, yes.
>
>>
>> It would not reflect the current state of the base system. We are in
>> first place looking for app testers not system testers.
>>
>> So I do not recommend to label what we will show as Beta 2.
>>
>> ++ GDP 11 preview
>>
>> Since the next release will be GDP 11, calling this image a preview
>> (or
>> similar) would provide the idea that what you will see is not polished
>> at the level of the coming release, which is true.
>
> Preview - that works.
>
>>
>> It would not interfere with our current release cycle and would
>> provide the idea that by attending to the event or downloading the
>> image, you will have a sense of "what is coming". I think this approach is accurate.
>>
>> The fact that we present a limited amount of ports and test coverage
>> is consistent with what you expect on a "preview".
>>
>> On the other hand, in order to attract testers, a specific
>> complementary message would be needed. It would also require to
>> mention that not the whole system is a preview, but just the new features.
>
> Earlier in this email you seemed to argue that RC2 + changes only in HMI creates a more unstable system as a whole (which I don't think many software engineers expect).  Now you are arguing that the base system is not a preview but a stable part, and the HMI is a preview.
> It's confusing and I feel that in an attempt to be "professional" in this release process you end up being more focused on problems than solutions.
>
> Release notes or similar presumably give the details of the content,
> right?   Why are you going on and on about what things would require?
> Just simply communicate the content of the system to the "customers" and be done with it.
>
> You are overthinking this in my opinion.  GDP is (still) not the Space Shuttle launch.
>
>>
>> ++ Development approach instead of delivery ones
>>
>> Another option is to unlink the new App launcher and demo apps from
>> the release cycle (in relation with the name), focusing on the
>> features themself, using a development approach instead of a delivery
>> one. This way, we would not mention GDP at all but the App launcher and demo apps.
>> The message would claim that the new features will land on GDP 11
>>
>> Since GDP 11 RC2 happens to be the latest stable pre-release, the new
>> feature is shown "on top of it" and an image for those interested will
>> be available. As with any other new feature, improvements are landing
>> in Master as ready.
>>
>> This message is consistent with the idea that developers can bring new
>> features to GDP as contributions, and mature them there to be able to
>> even move into compliance (code first approach).
>>
>> In this approach, a name for the app launcher and demo apps are needed.
>> It would be good if we provide them good product names. Almost nobody
>> knows what an HMI is, what an app launcher for automotive could look
>> like.... I would look for nice simple names, easy to refer to, moving
>> away from names like GDP, meta-ivi, Master...
>
> Sure, the HMI project can be named independently of the image discussion here, if someone wants an interesting name for the component.
>
> But please figure out a way to name the system so it can be released as an
> image.   If you can't make it fit into the GDP 11 naming scheme, how about
> a new minor release number.  GDP 11.5 (Preview) then?
>
>>
>> This would be my favourite approach.
>
> ...and as far as I can tell it is still going against what other GENIVI stakeholders have asked for.
>
> Best Regards
> - Gunnar
>
>>
>> Best Regards
>>
>> --
>> Agustin Benito Bethencourt
>> Principal Consultant - FOSS at Codethink
>> agustin.benito at codethink.co.uk
>> _______________________________________________
>> genivi-projects mailing list
>> genivi-projects at lists.genivi.org
>> http://lists.genivi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/genivi-projects
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: genivi-projects
>> [mailto:genivi-projects-bounces at lists.genivi.org] On Behalf Of Agustin
>> Benito Bethencourt
>> Sent: den 10 oktober 2016 12:23
>> To: Steve Crumb
>> Cc: genivi-projects at lists.genivi.org; Mike Nunnery
>> Subject: App launcher and demo apps preview: name
>>
>> Hi Steve,
>>
>> during the last GDP call you mentioned that GENIVI marketing is
>> discussing how to name the image to be shown at the 15th AMM.
>>
>> For those who has not been closely following the GDP project lately,
>> the image we are preparing for the 15th AMM is:
>> * GDP11 RC2 as base + a few updates
>> * New app launcher
>> * New demo apps
>> * RPi3 image
>>
>> ++ GDP 11 RC3
>>
>> GDP consumers and contributors would expect that RC3 would be more
>> stable than RC2, which is not the case.
>>
>> They would also expect to have at least the same number of tested
>> ports to targets than RC2, which is not the case either.
>>
>> So I do not recommend to label this image as RC3
>>
>> ++ GDP 11 beta 2
>>
>> Adding the label beta would better reflect the current state of the
>> new features, but it would break the current release sequence which
>> will confuse consumers and would make our documentation around our
>> release inconsistent.
>>
>> Moving back from RC2 to Beta 2 is not considered a good practice.
>>
>> It would not reflect the current state of the base system. We are in
>> first place looking for app testers not system testers.
>>
>> So I do not recommend to label what we will show as Beta 2.
>>
>> ++ GDP 11 preview
>>
>> Since the next release will be GDP 11, calling this image a preview
>> (or
>> similar) would provide the idea that what you will see is not polished
>> at the level of the coming release, which is true.
>>
>> It would not interfere with our current release cycle and would
>> provide the idea that by attending to the event or downloading the
>> image, you will have a sense of "what is coming". I think this approach is accurate.
>>
>> The fact that we present a limited amount of ports and test coverage
>> is consistent with what you expect on a "preview".
>>
>> On the other hand, in order to attract testers, a specific
>> complementary message would be needed. It would also require to
>> mention that not the whole system is a preview, but just the new features.
>>
>> ++ Development approach instead of delivery ones
>>
>> Another option is to unlink the new App launcher and demo apps from
>> the release cycle (in relation with the name), focusing on the
>> features themself, using a development approach instead of a delivery
>> one. This way, we would not mention GDP at all but the App launcher and demo apps.
>> The message would claim that the new features will land on GDP 11
>>
>> Since GDP 11 RC2 happens to be the latest stable pre-release, the new
>> feature is shown "on top of it" and an image for those interested will
>> be available. As with any other new feature, improvements are landing
>> in Master as ready.
>>
>> This message is consistent with the idea that developers can bring new
>> features to GDP as contributions, and mature them there to be able to
>> even move into compliance (code first approach).
>>
>> In this approach, a name for the app launcher and demo apps are needed.
>> It would be good if we provide them good product names. Almost nobody
>> knows what an HMI is, what an app launcher for automotive could look
>> like.... I would look for nice simple names, easy to refer to, moving
>> away from names like GDP, meta-ivi, Master...
>>
>> This would be my favourite approach.
>>
>> Best Regards
>>
>> --
>> Agustin Benito Bethencourt
>> Principal Consultant - FOSS at Codethink
>> agustin.benito at codethink.co.uk
>> _______________________________________________
>> genivi-projects mailing list
>> genivi-projects at lists.genivi.org
>> http://lists.genivi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/genivi-projects
>>

-- 
Agustin Benito Bethencourt
Principal Consultant - FOSS at Codethink
agustin.benito at codethink.co.uk



More information about the genivi-projects mailing list