On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 12:32 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > David Edmundson wrote: >What's important is that we all have the same goals, > otherwise we'll argue each time we get someone asking for better > integration. Fully agreed. That's the idea of usability basics. > I want to > say that we are _not_ to cater for Leonard's IRC use cases, and this needs > agreement and clarification. You argue with IRC idle vs. Konversation but > I'd like to think about all parts of KTp. To not support Leonard's use cases > means, for instance, no notifications on IRC, no birthday reminder in > contact list, no sip phone responder etc. (just brainstorming). Each > "protocol" will still have a specialized, full-featured application. > Correct? Following this postulation, the core usability goal of KTp would be > simplicity (KISS) in favor of functionality. The fewer controls are > provided, the easier Penny will use it. If so, we could change Leonard into > a so-called antipersona: his special requirements are stuff that is > explicitely not part of the program. >Things I'd like to change: "whilst > busy doing something not KTp related"... done Thanks for your reply, Heiko. >
Update on this, there's been some comments on IRC/real life, but this thread hasn't been updated. We still haven't decided this "to what extent do we support IRC if at all?" and as that's clearly an issue it's a main topic of our official next meeting at Akademy. There's arguments both for and against, and they're both valid and sensible. Hopefully a face-to-face debate will sort this finally. > _______________________________________________ > KDE-Telepathy mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-telepathy > _______________________________________________ KDE-Telepathy mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-telepathy
