Every year I look how I could give a few hours a week, but I leave bewildered (seems like every projects wants you to fork ans submit changes). Do you or anyone know of arrangement more like “here’s a ticket, punch in, do it, punch out”.
seems like every projects wants you to fork ans submit changes
I think that’s just how software devs tend to work: a main “trunk” of code, from which they branch off for a feature or change, then when they’re done writing the new code, merge it back into the trunk. That’s the mode we’re used to, the only tool we know for managing parallel code development.
How else would we do things? Or rather: how would you do things? This isn’t a rhetorical question: I genuinely admit I don’t know how you’d prefer to operate, or what you mean by punching in and out.
If you’re asking for specific tasks, projects may have an issue tracker of some form where you can find stuff other people found, but other than that, FOSS often is a “see something that needs fixing, go and fix it” thing. Particularly if the devs themselves don’t notice a problem, because they know what that confusing icon means or how that tool works, they won’t create a task they don’t even know needs doing. Even if they know something is bad, they might not know how to make it better.
If you’re using or trying to use a program and notice something has been done poorly, is too complex for an entry-level user, whatever it is you think could or should be improved, talk to the people making it, or look for a contribution guide.
Even if you can’t contribute code, it might be helpful to share your skills and knowledge by opening issues, explaining specific problems and offering ways to solve them.
No, I don’t think you’re missing anything. That’s the issue at hand here: creating proper, usable software takes time and effort. FOSS-developers tend to prefer pouring their time and effort into functional code, with the UI primarily shaped by their own needs rather than a thorough analysis of what other users could want. Often, tools are the result of someone building something for themselves and figuring they’d share it with others.
To properly design for a broad audience is an extremely selfless ask, and for all that these devs donate their time to the public, they only have so much to give. I think it’s fair that they’d prefer working on things they benefit from too, but that means sacrificing general usability for personal expediency.
And that’s why so many tools are clunky: they’re “good enough” for the developer, and nobody cares to also make them good enough for the rest of the user group.
Yeah, I think the extension of “We need to acknowledge that UX is important” is going to be “We need to negotiate a mode of working that enables UX volunteers to help efficiently.” I’ve been out of software development for years, only tangentially worked with UX designers for a university project (and even that was basically just a bunch of UI mockups I was supposed to implement, so I never saw the process). I don’t know how the industry has solved that question (if at all), but the less hierarchical FOSS system may have to find its own way.
I’m glad that you have any interest in the topic at all, and thank you for shedding some light on your side of the issue.
What i did more than once was directly get in contact with a mantainer or the lead developer(more often than not i befriended them too) and suggest some GUI improvements directly, it’s ofc not doable everytime because otherwise the devs would just have too many people to manage.
Instead, ask if you can join the development team as the “UX/UI person” and show what works you already did, there is a good chance that you can either join or they will ear you out more often when you make an Issue/PR
Becsuse you get someone in on the creation thst can say things like.
“99% of all software uses Control+s to save, yes W stands for Write Out, but literally no one thinks that way and Control W is unintuitive.”
“People prefer larger icons with meaningful symbols.”
“This setting is only accessible by using a CLI to edit a .conf file in /etc/software/config/current and thats a terrible design.”
“Your pop up dialogs should all be consistently sized with Yes/Cancel buttons in the same space so users can more instinctively know where to click.”
“The window design looks like Windows 95 and makes people think they are in prison and has driven at least one user to depression and suicide, maybe consider modernizing the look with some color and roundness.”
How the hell do UX designers contribute?!
Every year I look how I could give a few hours a week, but I leave bewildered (seems like every projects wants you to fork ans submit changes). Do you or anyone know of arrangement more like “here’s a ticket, punch in, do it, punch out”.
I think that’s just how software devs tend to work: a main “trunk” of code, from which they branch off for a feature or change, then when they’re done writing the new code, merge it back into the trunk. That’s the mode we’re used to, the only tool we know for managing parallel code development.
How else would we do things? Or rather: how would you do things? This isn’t a rhetorical question: I genuinely admit I don’t know how you’d prefer to operate, or what you mean by punching in and out.
If you’re asking for specific tasks, projects may have an issue tracker of some form where you can find stuff other people found, but other than that, FOSS often is a “see something that needs fixing, go and fix it” thing. Particularly if the devs themselves don’t notice a problem, because they know what that confusing icon means or how that tool works, they won’t create a task they don’t even know needs doing. Even if they know something is bad, they might not know how to make it better.
If you’re using or trying to use a program and notice something has been done poorly, is too complex for an entry-level user, whatever it is you think could or should be improved, talk to the people making it, or look for a contribution guide.
Even if you can’t contribute code, it might be helpful to share your skills and knowledge by opening issues, explaining specific problems and offering ways to solve them.
Great points.
The way I’ve worked is usually: onboarding, identify work to be done, tickets (part of that forking), review/done.
So if the onboarding, identifying wtbd and then the work is done by me independently… that seems like weeks of work to submit a suggestion… you know?
UX design work needs a lot of research, understanding and alignment to stick.
Am I missing something?
No, I don’t think you’re missing anything. That’s the issue at hand here: creating proper, usable software takes time and effort. FOSS-developers tend to prefer pouring their time and effort into functional code, with the UI primarily shaped by their own needs rather than a thorough analysis of what other users could want. Often, tools are the result of someone building something for themselves and figuring they’d share it with others.
To properly design for a broad audience is an extremely selfless ask, and for all that these devs donate their time to the public, they only have so much to give. I think it’s fair that they’d prefer working on things they benefit from too, but that means sacrificing general usability for personal expediency.
And that’s why so many tools are clunky: they’re “good enough” for the developer, and nobody cares to also make them good enough for the rest of the user group.
Confirms what i thought, thanks. Maybe we need to make a better process for this, or champion it if there is always one.
Yeah, I think the extension of “We need to acknowledge that UX is important” is going to be “We need to negotiate a mode of working that enables UX volunteers to help efficiently.” I’ve been out of software development for years, only tangentially worked with UX designers for a university project (and even that was basically just a bunch of UI mockups I was supposed to implement, so I never saw the process). I don’t know how the industry has solved that question (if at all), but the less hierarchical FOSS system may have to find its own way.
I’m glad that you have any interest in the topic at all, and thank you for shedding some light on your side of the issue.
What i did more than once was directly get in contact with a mantainer or the lead developer(more often than not i befriended them too) and suggest some GUI improvements directly, it’s ofc not doable everytime because otherwise the devs would just have too many people to manage.
Instead, ask if you can join the development team as the “UX/UI person” and show what works you already did, there is a good chance that you can either join or they will ear you out more often when you make an Issue/PR
Becsuse you get someone in on the creation thst can say things like.
“99% of all software uses Control+s to save, yes W stands for Write Out, but literally no one thinks that way and Control W is unintuitive.”
“People prefer larger icons with meaningful symbols.”
“This setting is only accessible by using a CLI to edit a .conf file in /etc/software/config/current and thats a terrible design.”
“Your pop up dialogs should all be consistently sized with Yes/Cancel buttons in the same space so users can more instinctively know where to click.”
“The window design looks like Windows 95 and makes people think they are in prison and has driven at least one user to depression and suicide, maybe consider modernizing the look with some color and roundness.”