Let me be honest. As designer I’m a team of one in this small project. I’m alone.
And I don’t think this is necessarily bad, despite valuing a cohesive community and belonging to the entire project. In fact I believe working together is the single most important aspect of a free software project succeeding, even more important than the amount of contributors or their skill levels.
Certainly not being alone would be better, but I think being the one designer is still good – as we need versatile skills to do great things. Here is the catch: being the only designer among many non-designers, and only getting privileges and rights of a coder without being able to use them is not good enough.
Design approaches a project from different angles, gets applied differently, requires different skills. As a designer I can’t just join a process that is streamlined to create code. In order to be able to have a relevant impact on a release a new way of influence would have to be established, something not depending on git. There needs to be a place for decisions and consensus even before code gets created.
This is another way of me saying that design needs to have more power. Commit rights just don’t do the trick here.
I’m not delusional. I do see the intricate problem of asking volunteers to follow design consensus of a team of one - in that case me. I’m just speaking up and saying that in my eyes a design circle with authority is necessary.
This begs the question of what authority I’m talking about. But I can’t answer that. It is up to all non-design project members to decide in how far they are willing to delegate. I’d love to contribute to the project and am interested in hearing how you image this could work in the future.
What decision making power should a design circle have in your eyes?