On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 10:40 PM, Thomas Pfeiffer <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sunday 01 February 2015 20:46:14 Martin Klapetek wrote: > >> Applications, sure. But personally I remain unconvinced that an IM client >> is more important than a file manager, picture viewer or text editor, which >> are all not part of Plasma-the-package-that's-being-shipped. >> >> Regardless of what's stated in the vision, I think this should be viewed >> from "the other side", from the Plasma side. And that would be a "why >> does Plasma have IM client and not a basic file manager or picture >> viewer" question, so imo in makes little sense to go with Plasma... > > I agree that this discrepancy is weird, but I am fully convinced that Plasma > _should_ ship with basic applications. GNOME does that. XFCE does that. > LXDE/LXQt do that. Could it be that Plasma is the only major desktop > environment that doesn't ship basic applications with it? > > I'm okay with putting KTp in Applications for the time being, but the goal > should be to either bundle existing applications with Plasma or create new > ones for it (I'm thinking of the likes of Jungle and Koko and Bangarang, and > hopefully a simpler but more visually pleasing QML file browser at some > point).
Let me defend Martin's point of view now. As we discussed not that long ago in kde-promo (I think), in my opionion, there's missing terminology anyway. Plasma is far too many things: a framework, a shell toolkit, a desktop, etc. I identify 2 colliding concepts: - KDE Telepathy is more of a service than an application. It's, by definition, the integration of a system service (Telepathy) into the Plasma shell. - Plasma developers are the people who make the shell. We need to find a way to make these both compatible. I'm unsure how, I thought it was a problem solved, maybe not. Aleix _______________________________________________ KDE-Telepathy mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-telepathy
