mirror of https://github.com/zulip/zulip.git
272 lines
12 KiB
Markdown
272 lines
12 KiB
Markdown
# Design discussions
|
||
|
||
We discuss ideas for improving Zulip's user experience, interface, and visual
|
||
design in the [Zulip development
|
||
community](https://zulip.com/development-community/). The purpose of these
|
||
design discussions is to help us make smart, well-informed decisions about
|
||
design changes to the Zulip product. We want Zulip to work great for a diverse
|
||
array of users and organizations, and discussions in the development community
|
||
are an incredibly valuable source of insight and ideas. We welcome all
|
||
perspectives, respectfully shared.
|
||
|
||
Most design discussions take place in the [#design][design channel] channel in the
|
||
development community. Discussions about mobile app design happen in
|
||
[#mobile-team](https://chat.zulip.org/#narrow/channel/243-mobile-team), and
|
||
design of the terminal app is discussed in
|
||
[#zulip-terminal](https://chat.zulip.org/#narrow/channel/206-zulip-terminal).
|
||
|
||
## Guidelines for all participants
|
||
|
||
Everyone is encouraged to participate in design discussions! Your participation
|
||
greatly helps improve the product, especially when you focus your contributions
|
||
on supporting the productivity of the design team. The more we are able to
|
||
incorporate a variety of ideas, experiences, and perspectives into the
|
||
discussion, the better decisions we'll be able to make.
|
||
|
||
Please start by reviewing the guide to [how we
|
||
communicate](how-we-communicate.md) in the Zulip community. Also, when sharing
|
||
your ideas:
|
||
|
||
- Think about corner cases and interactions with existing features that the
|
||
design will need to handle, and bring up problems with them, especially if they
|
||
are not obvious. (E.g., “This component also appears with a darker background
|
||
in the Drafts UI,” with a screenshot).
|
||
|
||
- Present technical considerations _where appropriate_. “X requires
|
||
some refactoring that would take me another hour,” is probably not
|
||
worth bringing up if X would produce a better user
|
||
experience. “Adding X might require removing feature Y,” or “X is
|
||
incompatible with Zulip's security model,” is important to present
|
||
early.
|
||
|
||
Note that [#design][design channel] is a high-traffic channel, and thoughtful
|
||
participation takes time. Don’t let it prevent you from doing your own work. It
|
||
can be helpful to pick particular conversations to follow, where you feel that
|
||
you have insight to share.
|
||
|
||
## Participant roles
|
||
|
||
At this point, it will be helpful to define a few key roles in design
|
||
discussions:
|
||
|
||
- [Code contributor](#guidelines-for-code-contributors): Anyone working on a PR
|
||
that includes some frontend changes.
|
||
|
||
- [Community moderator](#guidelines-for-community-moderators): Any core
|
||
contributor or other experienced community member who is helping guide the
|
||
discussion (with or without "moderator" permissions in the organization).
|
||
|
||
- **Design team**: Anyone working actively on the design of the feature at hand
|
||
and/or overall design for the Zulip product.
|
||
|
||
- [Decision makers](#guidelines-for-decision-makers): Project maintainers
|
||
responsible for design decisions, including design leaders, product leaders,
|
||
and overall project leadership.
|
||
|
||
## Guidelines for code contributors
|
||
|
||
When you are working on a PR that includes frontend changes, you may find it helpful
|
||
to get interactive feedback on the design. The best way to do so is by posting a
|
||
message in the [#design][design channel] channel in the Zulip development
|
||
community.
|
||
|
||
### When to post
|
||
|
||
- The issue or a comment on your PR specifically asks you to get feedback in the
|
||
[#design][design channel] channel.
|
||
|
||
- The issue you’re working on is not specific about some design point, and you
|
||
would like advice.
|
||
|
||
- You’ve implemented an issue as described, but the UI doesn’t look good or
|
||
seems awkward to use.
|
||
|
||
- You’re prototyping an idea that’s not fully fleshed out.
|
||
|
||
### Guidelines for requesting design feedback
|
||
|
||
You will get the most helpful feedback by sharing enough context for community
|
||
participants to understand what you're trying to do, and clearly stating the
|
||
questions you are looking for feedback on. Some advice:
|
||
|
||
- Start a new topic, or use an existing one if there is a topic linked from the
|
||
issue you’re working on. If you’re starting a new topic, appending the issue
|
||
or PR number (e.g., `#1234`) to the topic name will turn it into a handy link.
|
||
|
||
- Summarize the feature you’re working on. You should provide enough
|
||
context for readers to understand your question, and include links
|
||
to any relevant issues or in-progress PRs for additional background.
|
||
|
||
- Post screenshots, and screen captures if there is an interaction that
|
||
screenshots fail to show.
|
||
|
||
- You may want to post a few screenshots of different options you’re
|
||
considering.
|
||
|
||
- Screenshots should show enough of the app to evaluate how the new feature
|
||
looks in its context, but not so much that it’s hard to see the feature.
|
||
|
||
- Screen captures should demonstrate the feature with a minimal amount of
|
||
extraneous content.
|
||
|
||
- See [here](../tutorials/screenshot-and-gif-software.md) for some
|
||
recommended tools.
|
||
|
||
- Post a clear question or set of questions that you need help with. What
|
||
specifically are you looking for feedback on?
|
||
|
||
- Since you’ve been working on this issue, you have likely gained some expertise
|
||
in this area. Educate others by sharing any tradeoffs and relevant
|
||
considerations you’re aware of.
|
||
|
||
Keep in mind that the Zulip community is distributed around the world, and you
|
||
should not expect to get realtime feedback. However, feel free to bump the
|
||
thread if you don’t see a response after a couple of business days.
|
||
|
||
## Guidelines for community moderators
|
||
|
||
Any experienced community participant can guide design discussions, and help
|
||
make sure that we use everyone's time productively towards making the best
|
||
decisions we can.
|
||
|
||
### Improving the quality of discussions
|
||
|
||
Here are some suggestions for how you can help the community have a productive
|
||
design discussion:
|
||
|
||
- If a design discussion seems to have been derailed by a tangent or argument,
|
||
consider moving the tangent to another topic so that the conversation can
|
||
refocus on the questions at hand.
|
||
|
||
- If the direction of the discussion seems unproductive, you can explicitly
|
||
suggest circling back to a topic where additional discussion seems valuable.
|
||
|
||
- If someone is repeating the same points in a way that’s unhelpful, you can let
|
||
them know that you understand what they are saying and appreciate their
|
||
feedback, but at this point would find it helpful to hear feedback from other
|
||
participants. People may sometimes repeat themselves because they are not feeling
|
||
heard.
|
||
|
||
- That said, sometimes the best way to deal with questions or feedback that
|
||
don’t move the discussion forward is to let them go by without comment, rather
|
||
than potentially getting into a protracted back-and-forth that derails the
|
||
thread. Examples of such feedback include unmotivated personal opinions,
|
||
proposals that ignore counterarguments that have already been discussed, etc.
|
||
|
||
- It’s totally fine to let the conversation slow down or die, especially if it
|
||
seems to be going off-track. If the decision makers feel that they do not have
|
||
enough feedback yet, they can revive the conversation as needed, and the pause
|
||
can serve as a good reset.
|
||
|
||
If a conversation is going off-track and you are not sure how to fix it, please
|
||
ping someone on the core team to intervene and help get the conversion into a
|
||
better state.
|
||
|
||
### Moving threads to the most appropriate channel
|
||
|
||
Sometimes it helps to move (part of) a thread to a different channel, so that
|
||
it's seen by the appropriate audience.
|
||
|
||
- We generally aim to discuss raw user feedback on the product’s design in
|
||
[#feedback](https://chat.zulip.org/#narrow/channel/137-feedback).
|
||
The [#design][design channel] should be reserved for design aspects that we’re
|
||
actively (considering) working on. This lets the design team focus on
|
||
discussions that are expected to result in actionable decisions.
|
||
|
||
- If a discussion that started in another channel has shifted into the design
|
||
phase, moving the discussion to [#design][design channel] helps the design team
|
||
follow the conversation.
|
||
|
||
- Discussion of implementation-related decisions should ideally happen in
|
||
[#frontend](https://chat.zulip.org/#narrow/channel/6-frontend). The line can
|
||
sometimes blur (and that’s OK), but we should aim to move (parts of) the
|
||
thread if there is an extensive conversation that belongs in the other channel.
|
||
|
||
- We use [#mobile-team](https://chat.zulip.org/#narrow/channel/243-mobile-team)
|
||
for discussions of mobile app design, and
|
||
[#zulip-terminal](https://chat.zulip.org/#narrow/channel/206-zulip-terminal) for
|
||
terminal app design.
|
||
|
||
## Guidelines for decision makers
|
||
|
||
The main purpose of design discussions is to help us make the best design
|
||
decisions we can. Decision makers should guide the conversation to elicit the
|
||
ideas, feedback and advice they need from the community.
|
||
|
||
Ideally, design discussions should also help us learn as a community. Community
|
||
members who follow the conversation should get a better understanding of the
|
||
considerations behind the decisions being discussed, and thus be better able to
|
||
contribute to the next conversation.
|
||
|
||
### Managing the discussion
|
||
|
||
Decision makers should actively manage the discussion to make sure we're making
|
||
good use of everyone's time and attention, and getting useful feedback.
|
||
|
||
- Decision makers should aim to follow design threads closely and provide input
|
||
early and often, so that conversations don’t get blocked waiting for their
|
||
opinion.
|
||
|
||
- Decision makers should actively manage discussion threads when needed in order
|
||
to seek the types of inputs that will help them. This may include outlining a
|
||
set of alternatives to consider, posing questions to dig into someone’s
|
||
feedback, asking for ideas to solve a specific design challenge, etc.
|
||
|
||
- Decision makers should explain the reasoning behind their proposed decisions,
|
||
so that it’s possible to identify any gaps in their thinking, and in order to
|
||
build a shared understanding in the community.
|
||
|
||
- That said, decision makers are not required to respond to every comment being
|
||
made regarding a proposal, or to answer every question.
|
||
|
||
### From discussion to decision
|
||
|
||
There is a number of factors that affect when it’s time to move a thread from
|
||
discussion to a decision. In part, this depends on how significant a commitment
|
||
we are making with the decision at hand:
|
||
|
||
- We want to be very thoughtful about decisions that will take a lot of work to
|
||
implement, and/or will be difficult to undo.
|
||
|
||
- We should try to come up with good designs for the features we're building,
|
||
but sometimes it's difficult to foresee how an interaction will feel until we
|
||
try it. Prototyping a UI we are not sure about is a normal part of the design
|
||
process.
|
||
|
||
- When the decision results in filing a non-urgent issue, it’s fine to write up
|
||
the conclusions on GitHub relatively quickly, and update the issue if more
|
||
ideas come in later on.
|
||
|
||
- We should accept that sometimes an idea we decided on is just not working out,
|
||
and be willing to go back to the drawing board or iterate further until we get
|
||
to a state we're happy with.
|
||
|
||
With those considerations in mind, here are rough guidelines for when to move on
|
||
to a decision:
|
||
|
||
- For very small decisions, it may be enough to get a sanity-check from one or
|
||
two well-informed community participants.
|
||
|
||
- For more significant decisions, one should generally allow at least 1-2 business
|
||
days for discussion, to give core team members time to share their perspective
|
||
if they have something to contribute.
|
||
|
||
- Beyond that minimum, the decision makers can move to the decision phase
|
||
whenever they have enough input to make a well-informed decision. Here are
|
||
some situations that would indicate that it’s time to move on:
|
||
|
||
- There is general consensus on how to proceed. Or, there is consensus
|
||
between the well-informed participants in the discussion.
|
||
|
||
- For a relatively small decision, there is enough useful feedback to
|
||
generate a solid proposal.
|
||
|
||
- If the discussion is primarily rehashing old points, and doesn’t seem to
|
||
be generating additional insights, it’s time to redirect the conversation
|
||
or move on to a decision.
|
||
|
||
- If the thread has died down, and the decision makers feel that they have
|
||
enough information to go on. (If they don’t, the thread can be bumped.)
|
||
|
||
[design channel]: https://chat.zulip.org/#narrow/channel/101-design
|