Phil Bull [2010-07-01 11:12 -0000]:
> Regarding the outdated docs: I'll push this as a task for the Docs team.
> I think the plan might be to move the documentation into the jockey
> package itself (IIRC, it's kept in ubuntu-docs at the moment).
I agree that this would make more sense indeed.
> Have you had any user input on the name?
Not me personally.
> Rather than going for what is the most logical name, it would be
> better for users if you gave it the name that they expect for this
> sort of utility (the two don't always coincide!).
Well, in the end they expect their hardware to "just work" without
having to use such a tool at all :-)
Beyond that I can't give any input on usability testing, I'm afraid.
Phil Bull [2010-07-01 11:12 -0000]:
> Regarding the outdated docs: I'll push this as a task for the Docs team.
> I think the plan might be to move the documentation into the jockey
> package itself (IIRC, it's kept in ubuntu-docs at the moment).
I agree that this would make more sense indeed.
> Have you had any user input on the name?
Not me personally.
> Rather than going for what is the most logical name, it would be
> better for users if you gave it the name that they expect for this
> sort of utility (the two don't always coincide!).
Well, in the end they expect their hardware to "just work" without
having to use such a tool at all :-)
Beyond that I can't give any input on usability testing, I'm afraid.