Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Martin Graesslin]

On Friday, February 12, 2016 12:07:27 PM CET Alexander Dymo wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:04 AM, Martin Graesslin  
wrote:
> > Why should there be a line?
> 
> I've been managing software development organizations since 2008. I
> attest to the importance of drawing a line. There's so much you can do
> with software. Unless you learn to say "no", you will not make a good
> product.
> 
> By the way, I learned this the hard way in open source world too. Let
> me tell you a story.
> 
> When I was a KDevelop maintainer during 3.x cycle, I welcomed every
> single KDevelop plugin into the core.
> 
> End result? We did not attract new developers this way, but instead
> were forced to maintain a huge collection of barely useful software
> with a small team.
> 
> During 4.x development we clearly defined the core of KDevelop. It was
> to be a great C++ IDE. Any plugin that did not fit into the core was
> separated into its own repository. What remained received as much
> attention as possible.
> 
> End result? A much better product. New contributors. And guess what?
> Some of the plugins that were separated not only survived, but saw
> more development and usage.

I interpret your answer as "KWin should not go into the cloud".

Thank you for your answer.

Martin


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Martin Graesslin]

On Monday, February 15, 2016 9:48:18 PM CET Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> On Monday, February 15, 2016 14:00:45 Alexander Dymo wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 1:01 AM, Martin Graesslin 
> 
> wrote:
> > > That's what we have been doing the last few years, so where are they?
> > > Where
> > > are the devs taking our application to mobile, etc. etc.
> > 
> > KF(5) has barely reached the point where it's usable on mobile
> > devices. Before it was too painful (I tried), and I know of several
> > examples where people went Qt-only to be able to produce a mobile app.
> > Same applies to cross-platform desktop apps.
> > 
> > I mean, there was a huge amount of work done within KDE to make this
> > possible. There's still a huge amount of work to make it easy. It's
> > about time to capitalize on that instead of trying every other cool
> > thing out there and spreading too thin.
> 
> +1

hey can we be a little bit more ambitious about KDE?


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Alexander Dymo]

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 1:01 AM, Martin Graesslin  wrote:
> That's what we have been doing the last few years, so where are they? Where
> are the devs taking our application to mobile, etc. etc.

KF(5) has barely reached the point where it's usable on mobile
devices. Before it was too painful (I tried), and I know of several
examples where people went Qt-only to be able to produce a mobile app.
Same applies to cross-platform desktop apps.

I mean, there was a huge amount of work done within KDE to make this
possible. There's still a huge amount of work to make it easy. It's
about time to capitalize on that instead of trying every other cool
thing out there and spreading too thin.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Alexander Neundorf]

On Saturday, February 13, 2016 15:35:01 Martin Graesslin wrote:
...
> I can turn that 180 degree around and argue that we are currently too narrow
> minded to get new people in and are not doing great. Hey look all the
> awesome work with Plasma 5 and Wayland. We are doing desktop, desktop,
> desktop. Have a new mobile shell. And where are the devs? Where are the
> people following in that pretty clear direction?
> 
> So apparently having the direction seems not to work. People don't follow.
> So maybe we are too narrow? Lose the people who are actually out there and
> do hip stuff?

If you say "desktop, desktop, desktop", yes, that's too narrow.
We suggest desktop, PLUS cross-platform applications (that's not a focus right 
now) PLUS cross-platform libraries (putting even more emphasis on KF5).
I think those two can get us a lot of new users and hopefully developers.

Alex

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Lydia Pintscher]

I am currently going through all the feedback again. Thanks for all your
really useful feedback, Ingo. We'll take over a lot of it for the second
draft.

On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 5:00 PM Ingo Klöcker  wrote:

> So, how about
> "KDE enables everyone to control their digital life without compromising
> their
> privacy."


It seems to me this is pitching control against privacy. If you want more
control you need to give up your privacy. To me one doesn't follow from the
other. Or am I missing something important?

Cheers
Lydia
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Lydia Pintscher]

On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 12:33 PM Marco Martin  wrote:

> On Tuesday 09 February 2016 12:19:54 Kevin Ottens wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Sorry, but there was a bait I couldn't resist here. :-)
> >
> > On Tuesday, 9 February 2016 11:55:35 CET Marco Martin wrote:
> > > * "makes simple things easy" not sure about that, aren't simple things
> > > already supposed to be easy? :p (makes doing things easy?)
> >
> > In fact not, simple things can be terribly difficult to achieve
> (complexity
> > vs difficulty spectrums). I think the proposed phrasing points it out
> well:
> > * simple vs complex;
> >  * easy vs possible.
> >
> > That being said, I wonder how many people will fall for it like you did
> > here. Most people tend to conflate simple with easy and complex with
> > difficult.
>
> yep you are right, I do wonder if there is a problem in phrasing here tough
>

Does anyone have a suggestion for a good wording here that makes it clearer?


Cheers
Lydia
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Ingo Klöcker]

On Sunday 14 February 2016 20:16:57 Lydia Pintscher wrote:
> I am currently going through all the feedback again. Thanks for all
> your really useful feedback, Ingo. We'll take over a lot of it for
> the second draft.
> 
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 5:00 PM Ingo Klöcker  wrote:
> > So, how about
> > "KDE enables everyone to control their digital life without
> > compromising their
> > privacy."
> 
> It seems to me this is pitching control against privacy. If you want
> more control you need to give up your privacy.

I cannot follow you. Why do you think that you need to give up your 
privacy if you want more control?

I think the opposite is true. If you have full control over your digital 
life, then (for me) this implies that you have full control over your 
data. So, we could probably even remove the "without compromising their 
privacy" part from the vision statement (but we should then add it to an 
explanatory second sentence similar to how Oxfam explains with a second 
sentence what they mean by "a just world without poverty").


Regards,
Ingo


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Lydia Pintscher]

On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 9:34 PM Ingo Klöcker  wrote:

> On Sunday 14 February 2016 20:16:57 Lydia Pintscher wrote:
> > I am currently going through all the feedback again. Thanks for all
> > your really useful feedback, Ingo. We'll take over a lot of it for
> > the second draft.
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 5:00 PM Ingo Klöcker  wrote:
> > > So, how about
> > > "KDE enables everyone to control their digital life without
> > > compromising their
> > > privacy."
> >
> > It seems to me this is pitching control against privacy. If you want
> > more control you need to give up your privacy.
>
> I cannot follow you. Why do you think that you need to give up your
> privacy if you want more control?
>
> I think the opposite is true. If you have full control over your digital
> life, then (for me) this implies that you have full control over your
> data.
>

Yes exactly :) But to me the revised draft has a slight bent saying the
opposite.

Cheers
Lydia
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Sebastian Kügler]

On Friday, February 12, 2016 09:15:09 PM Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> On Friday, February 12, 2016 21:00:37 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> ...
> 
> > Maybe what you want is an overarching product vision instead of a
> > community
> > vision, after all?
> 
> I think I can answer at least for everybody from the alternative-draft
> team,  maybe also for the people who want more "direction" in KDE: yes.

Obvious suggestion: go forth and create product visions? (We did the same, 
it's a useful exercise, but orthogonal to this discussion.)
-- 
sebas

http://www.kde.org | http://vizZzion.org
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Martin Graesslin]

On Friday, February 12, 2016 8:57:36 PM CET Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Friday, February 12, 2016 08:04:10 Martin Graesslin wrote:
> > On Thursday, February 11, 2016 10:06:33 PM CET Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > > On Thursday, February 11, 2016 10:06:57 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, February 10, 2016 10:08:19 PM Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 23:03:47 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> ...
> 
> > > so do I understand correctly that in general you would consider projects
> > > like a shell, a compiler and a text-mode editor as potential KDE
> > > projects
> > > ?
> > > 
> > > What's your opinion on one of the original goals of KDE to provide a set
> > > of
> > > software with a consistent look & feel and usability, stuff like common
> > > printing dialogs, file dialog, help systems, dialog layouts, etc, etc. ?
> > > 
> > > > > What about non-software projects like Project Gutenberg (free
> > > > > books),
> > > > > Jamendo  (free indie music), SubSurfWiki.org (free knowledge) ?
> > > > > Paraview (empowering students and scientists) ?
> > > > 
> > > > The draft states clear that we do Free software.
> 
> ...
> 
> > > Where do you draw the line ?
> > 
> > Why should there be a line?
> 
> people have been asking exactly that wrt. to the focused vision all the time
> continuously, so I think the team of the inclusive-draft can also answer a
> few questions.

As you might know (or not), I'm not a member of the inclusive team and have 
not collaborated on the draft. I'm asking questions to get an informed opinion 
and to see how it aligns with my opinion.

I asked identical questions to both proposals. On one I got a good answer and 
didn't ask further question, on the other I didn't. So I continued to ask 
questions as I still don't really understand what it will mean for me and the 
projects I'm working on.

Because of that I would highly appreciate if you would answer my questions and 
not hijack my thread to ask questions on another proposal.

Thank you!

Martin

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Martin Graesslin]

On Friday, February 12, 2016 11:45:53 AM CET Alexander Dymo wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Riccardo Iaconelli  
wrote:
> > I honestly still find it strange that in this discussion we insist on
> > drawing a circle defining "what is/can be KDE" (which, once more, is not
> > what the vision would be supposed to mean) way smaller than what KDE
> > already is.
> 
> If KDE were doing great as is, we wouldn't have had this discussion
> today. I feel KDE lacks direction. But a broad vision proposal seems
> to just document the fact that KDE lacks direction and brings no
> value.

I can turn that 180 degree around and argue that we are currently too narrow 
minded to get new people in and are not doing great. Hey look all the awesome 
work with Plasma 5 and Wayland. We are doing desktop, desktop, desktop. Have a 
new mobile shell. And where are the devs? Where are the people following in 
that pretty clear direction?

So apparently having the direction seems not to work. People don't follow. So 
maybe we are too narrow? Lose the people who are actually out there and do hip 
stuff?

Cheers
Martin


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Alexander Dymo]

On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Riccardo Iaconelli  wrote:
> I honestly still find it strange that in this discussion we insist on
> drawing a circle defining "what is/can be KDE" (which, once more, is not
> what the vision would be supposed to mean) way smaller than what KDE already
> is.

If KDE were doing great as is, we wouldn't have had this discussion
today. I feel KDE lacks direction. But a broad vision proposal seems
to just document the fact that KDE lacks direction and brings no
value.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Alexander Dymo]

> Honestly, after all these words, I don't think that this is a "focused"
> vision, but more of an "exclusive" one (from the verb "to exclude"). In my
> opinion this somehow invalidates the proposal itself, as it will be
> inapplicable to already existing, live and vibrant KDE projects.

Prioritization (focus) and exclusion are different things.

I did previously say that some of these projects that you care about
may be better off being independent. I can explain if you wish.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Alexander Dymo]

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:04 AM, Martin Graesslin  wrote:
> Why should there be a line?

I've been managing software development organizations since 2008. I
attest to the importance of drawing a line. There's so much you can do
with software. Unless you learn to say "no", you will not make a good
product.

By the way, I learned this the hard way in open source world too. Let
me tell you a story.

When I was a KDevelop maintainer during 3.x cycle, I welcomed every
single KDevelop plugin into the core.

End result? We did not attract new developers this way, but instead
were forced to maintain a huge collection of barely useful software
with a small team.

During 4.x development we clearly defined the core of KDevelop. It was
to be a great C++ IDE. Any plugin that did not fit into the core was
separated into its own repository. What remained received as much
attention as possible.

End result? A much better product. New contributors. And guess what?
Some of the plugins that were separated not only survived, but saw
more development and usage.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Alexander Neundorf]

Hi,

On Friday, February 12, 2016 08:04:10 Martin Graesslin wrote:
> On Thursday, February 11, 2016 10:06:33 PM CET Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > On Thursday, February 11, 2016 10:06:57 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, February 10, 2016 10:08:19 PM Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 23:03:47 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
...
> > so do I understand correctly that in general you would consider projects
> > like a shell, a compiler and a text-mode editor as potential KDE projects
> > ?
> > 
> > What's your opinion on one of the original goals of KDE to provide a set
> > of
> > software with a consistent look & feel and usability, stuff like common
> > printing dialogs, file dialog, help systems, dialog layouts, etc, etc. ?
> > 
> > > > What about non-software projects like Project Gutenberg (free books),
> > > > Jamendo  (free indie music), SubSurfWiki.org (free knowledge) ?
> > > > Paraview (empowering students and scientists) ?
> > > 
> > > The draft states clear that we do Free software.
> > 
...
> > Where do you draw the line ?
> 
> Why should there be a line?

people have been asking exactly that wrt. to the focused vision all the time 
continuously, so I think the team of the inclusive-draft can also answer a few 
questions.

So I'd like to know too whether there are any technical limits or requirements 
for the Free software mentioned in the inclusive draft:
"KDE, through the creation of Free software, enables users to control their 
digital life. KDE software enables privacy, makes simple things
easy and complex scenarios possible while crossing device boundaries."

Until now the inclusive-team expressed that they don't see any technical 
requirements, as long as the motivation of the people behind the software 
projects matches ours.
I'd like to know whether I understand that correctly (and things like, as I 
said, compilers, curses tools, a shell, OS kernels, etc.) are considered just 
as good KDE projects as "classical" GUI software, or whether there is still an 
implied focus on GUI software ?

Also, one of the main motivations for the original KDE email was to get rid of 
the many different toolkits and instead provide a set of applications with a 
consistent, easy-to-use user interface.
From what I read, it is not obvious to me whether this is still considered a 
priority.
What is the opinion of the inclusive-draft team to that ?

Alex

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

On Freitag, 12. Februar 2016 12:07:27 CET Alexander Dymo wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:04 AM, Martin Graesslin  
wrote:
> > Why should there be a line?
> 
> I've been managing software development organizations since 2008. I
> attest to the importance of drawing a line. There's so much you can do
> with software. Unless you learn to say "no", you will not make a good
> product.

> By the way, I learned this the hard way in open source world too. Let
> me tell you a story.
> 
> When I was a KDevelop maintainer during 3.x cycle, I welcomed every
> single KDevelop plugin into the core.
> 
> End result? We did not attract new developers this way, but instead
> were forced to maintain a huge collection of barely useful software
> with a small team.
> 
> During 4.x development we clearly defined the core of KDevelop. It was
> to be a great C++ IDE. Any plugin that did not fit into the core was
> separated into its own repository. What remained received as much
> attention as possible.
> 
> End result? A much better product. New contributors. And guess what?
> Some of the plugins that were separated not only survived, but saw
> more development and usage.

See, here is the big difference: I (and I'm pretty certain most of the people 
arguing for an "inclusive" vision here) fully agree that a _product_ vision 
not only has to make clear what the product _should_ be, but also what it 
should _not_ be.

A product vision has to give a clear focus, because there is only so much you 
can do with given resources in a given time, plus more features increase code 
complexity and make maintaining the code more complex.

What we're talking about here, however, is not a product vision. Not at all. 
It is about how a _community_ wants the future to be. It is on a much higher 
level than a product vision.

Maybe what you want is an overarching product vision instead of a community 
vision, after all?




___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Alexander Neundorf]

On Friday, February 12, 2016 21:00:37 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
...
> Maybe what you want is an overarching product vision instead of a community
> vision, after all?

I think I can answer at least for everybody from the alternative-draft team, 
maybe also for the people who want more "direction" in KDE: yes.

Alex

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Clemens Toennies]

On Feb 12, 2016 9:14 PM, "Alexander Neundorf"  wrote:
>
> On Friday, February 12, 2016 21:00:37 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> ...
> > Maybe what you want is an overarching product vision instead of a
community
> > vision, after all?
>
> I think I can answer at least for everybody from the alternative-draft
team,
> maybe also for the people who want more "direction" in KDE: yes.

And you're "overarching (product) vision" to be adopted by all of KDE would
have to specifically mention "based on Qt"?

Greetings, Clemens.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Alexander Neundorf]

On Friday, February 12, 2016 21:37:23 Clemens Toennies wrote:
> On Feb 12, 2016 9:14 PM, "Alexander Neundorf"  wrote:
> > On Friday, February 12, 2016 21:00:37 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> > ...
> > 
> > > Maybe what you want is an overarching product vision instead of a
> 
> community
> 
> > > vision, after all?
> > 
> > I think I can answer at least for everybody from the alternative-draft
> 
> team,
> 
> > maybe also for the people who want more "direction" in KDE: yes.
> 
> And you're "overarching (product) vision" to be adopted by all of KDE would
> have to specifically mention "based on Qt"?

For the applications, I'm not completely sure, but anyway this would be just 
my opinion, I asked for the opinions of the others in my other mail 
("Summary...").

Alex

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Clemens Toennies]

On Feb 12, 2016 9:56 PM, "Alexander Dymo"  wrote:
>
> >> Maybe what you want is an overarching product vision instead of a
community
> >> vision, after all?
> >
> > I think I can answer at least for everybody from the alternative-draft
team,
> > maybe also for the people who want more "direction" in KDE: yes.
>
> +1
>
> It's "we do something useful" vs "we're happy and idealistic group of
people"

Sorry to ask:
Is this ironic with regards and respect for the people actually doing the
work?

Greetings, Clemens.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Clemens Toennies]

On Feb 12, 2016 10:10 PM, "Alexander Neundorf"  wrote:
>
> On Friday, February 12, 2016 21:37:23 Clemens Toennies wrote:
> > On Feb 12, 2016 9:14 PM, "Alexander Neundorf"  wrote:
> > > On Friday, February 12, 2016 21:00:37 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> > > ...
> > >
> > > > Maybe what you want is an overarching product vision instead of a
> >
> > community
> >
> > > > vision, after all?
> > >
> > > I think I can answer at least for everybody from the alternative-draft
> >
> > team,
> >
> > > maybe also for the people who want more "direction" in KDE: yes.
> >
> > And you're "overarching (product) vision" to be adopted by all of KDE
would
> > have to specifically mention "based on Qt"?
>
> For the applications, I'm not completely sure, but anyway this would be
just
> my opinion, I asked for the opinions of the others in my other mail
> ("Summary...").

Some thoughts about the possibilities of being "inclusive":

For KDE, a strategy used by the Romans to grow and sustain in size might be
successfull:

The Romans expanded by allowing people with "different missions" like
religious practices to exist within their empire, provided they accepted
the overall "vision" of basically being a Roman citizen abiding by defined
rules (imo our manifesto) and then gave them benefits like free public
bath, protection, etc.
So imo gtk or webcentric programs would be welcomed additions since they
diversified and expanded _the reach_ of the Empire.

Of course this topic is never black and white.
But maybe that example shows, that being more inclusive is not just
happy-people having an "illusionary, non-real world" vision here.

Greetings, Clemens.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Clemens Toennies]

On Feb 12, 2016 9:58 PM, "Alexander Dymo"  wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Clemens Toennies
>  wrote:
> > And you're "overarching (product) vision" to be adopted by all of KDE
would
> > have to specifically mention "based on Qt"?
>
> It was actually pushed way down into the last part of the mission
paragraphs...

So is there anyone from the "focused" team who wants to see this as
concrete part of the actual "vision"?

Greetings, Clemens.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Martin Graesslin]

On Thursday, February 11, 2016 10:06:33 PM CET Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> On Thursday, February 11, 2016 10:06:57 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> > On Wednesday, February 10, 2016 10:08:19 PM Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 23:03:47 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 23:15:21 Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > > > > I'll also start a new sub-thread.
> > > > > Since this vision draft is very broad: what kind of projects do you
> > > > > consider  to be covered by this vision draft ?
> > > > > Or, the other way round, are there projects, or types of projects
> > > > > which
> > > > > you see as not part of this vision ?
> > 
> > I don't know what exactly you mean with "being covered by" or "see as part
> > of the vision", but let's assume "projects that identify with the goals
> > described in our vision.
> > 
> > > > Sure. Projects that use open source licenses for purely economical
> > > > reasons, or those that don't care about the user, or her privacy.
> > > > 
> > > > A lot of it is about priorities, and the reason why people work on
> > > > these
> > > > project, their goals.
> > > 
> > > Let's get a bit more concrete.
> > > So I guess most GNU projects would fit ? Bash, gcc, emacs ?
> > 
> > GCC and Emacs (I couldn't find info about bash) require copyright
> > assigment
> > through a mandatory contributor license agreements *1. That would be
> > against KDE's manifesto. It makes sense to work together, but we disagree
> > about the how to do it.
> 
> so do I understand correctly that in general you would consider projects
> like a shell, a compiler and a text-mode editor as potential KDE projects ?
> 
> What's your opinion on one of the original goals of KDE to provide a set of
> software with a consistent look & feel and usability, stuff like common
> printing dialogs, file dialog, help systems, dialog layouts, etc, etc. ?
> 
> > > What about non-software projects like Project Gutenberg (free books),
> > > Jamendo  (free indie music), SubSurfWiki.org (free knowledge) ?
> > > Paraview (empowering students and scientists) ?
> > 
> > The draft states clear that we do Free software.
> 
> There's also a thin line here.
> Most web sites require some programming. Some more, some less. E.g. a
> knowledge site could have some special code for presenting/visualizing data,
> a music site could have custom solutions for streaming, etc.
> Where do you draw the line ?

Why should there be a line? So turning it around: if I start a cloud service 
within KDE to have KWin run in the cloud so that everyone can connect to it 
through a web browser, would that now start excluding KWin from KDE? If that 
then gets used to run Amarok in the cloud to stream music would that exclude 
Amarok from KDE?

Certainly not. And that's the problem I have with your approach. It's a two 
class world: everything which originates inside KDE is fine, but if it would 
come into KDE it's "No, no, that's not what we do!"

So instead of asking yourself what might join, please start to think where KDE 
might be going with their existing projects and derive your "line" from there.

Cheers
Martin

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Sebastian Kügler]

On Wednesday, February 10, 2016 10:08:19 PM Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 23:03:47 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 23:15:21 Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > > I'll also start a new sub-thread.
> > > Since this vision draft is very broad: what kind of projects do you
> > > consider  to be covered by this vision draft ?
> > > Or, the other way round, are there projects, or types of projects which
> > > you see as not part of this vision ?

I don't know what exactly you mean with "being covered by" or "see as part of 
the vision", but let's assume "projects that identify with the goals described 
in our vision.

> > Sure. Projects that use open source licenses for purely economical
> > reasons, or those that don't care about the user, or her privacy.
> >
> > A lot of it is about priorities, and the reason why people work on these
> > project, their goals.
> 
> Let's get a bit more concrete.
> So I guess most GNU projects would fit ? Bash, gcc, emacs ?

GCC and Emacs (I couldn't find info about bash) require copyright assigment 
through a mandatory contributor license agreements *1. That would be against 
KDE's manifesto. It makes sense to work together, but we disagree about the 
how to do it.

> What about non-software projects like Project Gutenberg (free books),
> Jamendo  (free indie music), SubSurfWiki.org (free knowledge) ?
> Paraview (empowering students and scientists) ?

The draft states clear that we do Free software.

*1 https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html
   http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/CONTRIBUTE

-- 
sebas

http://www.kde.org | http://vizZzion.org

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Riccardo Iaconelli]

On 11 February 2016 at 22:06, Alexander Neundorf  wrote:

> so do I understand correctly that in general you would consider projects
> like
> a shell, a compiler and a text-mode editor as potential KDE projects ?
>

I honestly still find it strange that in this discussion we insist on
drawing a circle defining "what is/can be KDE" (which, once more, is not
what the vision would be supposed to mean) way smaller than what KDE
already is.

Honestly, after all these words, I don't think that this is a "focused"
vision, but more of an "exclusive" one (from the verb "to exclude"). In my
opinion this somehow invalidates the proposal itself, as it will be
inapplicable to already existing, live and vibrant KDE projects.

Bye,
-Riccardo
-- 
Pace Peace Paix Paz Frieden Pax Pokój Friður Fred Béke 和平
Hasiti Lapé Hetep Malu Mир Wolakota Santiphap Irini Peoch שלום
Shanti Vrede Baris Rój Mír Taika Rongo Sulh Mir Py'guapy 평화
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Alexander Neundorf]

On Thursday, February 11, 2016 10:06:57 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 10, 2016 10:08:19 PM Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 23:03:47 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 23:15:21 Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > > > I'll also start a new sub-thread.
> > > > Since this vision draft is very broad: what kind of projects do you
> > > > consider  to be covered by this vision draft ?
> > > > Or, the other way round, are there projects, or types of projects
> > > > which
> > > > you see as not part of this vision ?
> 
> I don't know what exactly you mean with "being covered by" or "see as part
> of the vision", but let's assume "projects that identify with the goals
> described in our vision.
> 
> > > Sure. Projects that use open source licenses for purely economical
> > > reasons, or those that don't care about the user, or her privacy.
> > > 
> > > A lot of it is about priorities, and the reason why people work on these
> > > project, their goals.
> > 
> > Let's get a bit more concrete.
> > So I guess most GNU projects would fit ? Bash, gcc, emacs ?
> 
> GCC and Emacs (I couldn't find info about bash) require copyright assigment
> through a mandatory contributor license agreements *1. That would be against
> KDE's manifesto. It makes sense to work together, but we disagree about the
> how to do it.

so do I understand correctly that in general you would consider projects like 
a shell, a compiler and a text-mode editor as potential KDE projects ?

What's your opinion on one of the original goals of KDE to provide a set of 
software with a consistent look & feel and usability, stuff like common 
printing dialogs, file dialog, help systems, dialog layouts, etc, etc. ?


> > What about non-software projects like Project Gutenberg (free books),
> > Jamendo  (free indie music), SubSurfWiki.org (free knowledge) ?
> > Paraview (empowering students and scientists) ?
> 
> The draft states clear that we do Free software.

There's also a thin line here.
Most web sites require some programming. Some more, some less. E.g. a 
knowledge site could have some special code for presenting/visualizing data, a 
music site could have custom solutions for streaming, etc.
Where do you draw the line ?

Alex

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Alexander Neundorf]

On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 23:03:47 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 23:15:21 Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > I'll also start a new sub-thread.
> > Since this vision draft is very broad: what kind of projects do you
> > consider  to be covered by this vision draft ?
> > Or, the other way round, are there projects, or types of projects which
> > you
> > see as not part of this vision ?
> 
> Sure. Projects that use open source licenses for purely economical reasons,
> or those that don't care about the user, or her privacy.
> 
> A lot of it is about priorities, and the reason why people work on these
> project, their goals.

Let's get a bit more concrete.
So I guess most GNU projects would fit ? Bash, gcc, emacs ?
What about non-software projects like Project Gutenberg (free books), Jamendo 
(free indie music), SubSurfWiki.org (free knowledge) ?
Paraview (empowering students and scientists) ?

Alex

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Clemens Toennies]

On Feb 10, 2016 10:01 PM, "Alexander Neundorf"  wrote:
>
> So let's just assume Inkscape, since it was brought up here by Jos.
Clearly a
> GUI application, cross-platform and free. So far, clearly in. Our draft
says
> "familiar and consistent KDE user experience [...]. This is reached by
> following common guidelines and using common technologies." For that
part, no
> match.
> Let's assume, they would really want to become "Inkscape by KDE" (so
everybody
> sees it), maybe they would actually put some efforts into following KDE
> guidelines so they feel more like a KDE application despite using gtk ?

Or:
Inkscape, a KDE project.
Best served with a badge, see bottom here: https://zanshin.kde.org/

They even have a 'k' in it.

Greetings, Clemens.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Jos Poortvliet]

On Wednesday, February 10, 2016 7:59:20 AM BRST Clemens Toennies wrote:
> On Feb 9, 2016 11:42 PM, "Sebastian Kügler"  wrote:
> >
> > On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 23:07:56 Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 10:41:07 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> > > ...
> > >
> > > > As Martin said very well already: By defining our goals not in terms
> of
> > > > technology but in terms of values and principles, we don't lose the
> > > > technology aspect, we are still experts in Qt,
> > >
> > > sure we'll lose it long-term.
> > > If we don't focus at all on Qt,
> >
> > Nobody says that we don't focus at all on Qt. Our software is built
> around Qt,
> > and nobody wants to change that. It's because Qt is an excellent solution
> to
> > many of our problems, it just isn't a goal in itself, but a tool.
> 
> Provoking thought:
> With the recent shift of Gnome to exclusivity (leading to mint x-apps,
> ubuntu forks), what if more and more GTK applications would become KDE
> projects because of shared values inside an independent, welcoming
> community?
> Maybe then with everyone working closer together, we would be able to
> overcome the rift still dividing the linux enduser technologies when people
> start to sit on the same tables?

See my other, ridiculously long email about this. GNOME has a very different 
philosophy. I agree with you that there are probably GTK based projects which 
could fit just fine in KDE if we would be a bit less technology-focused. 
Inkscape, for one, seems to follow the KDE design philosophy closer than the 
GNOME one and they are debating moving to Qt regularly. If we'd tell them they 
could be a KDE project no matter what tech they use I predict that, if they 
decide to join, they'll move to Qt in a year or 2 anyway ;-)

> Greetings, Clemens.
> 



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Boudewijn Rempt]

On Wed, 10 Feb 2016, Jos Poortvliet wrote:


See my other, ridiculously long email about this. GNOME has a very different 
philosophy. I agree with you that there are probably GTK based projects which 
could fit just fine in KDE if we would be a bit less technology-focused. 
Inkscape, for one, seems to follow the KDE design philosophy closer than the 
GNOME one and they are debating moving to Qt regularly. If we'd tell them they 
could be a KDE project no matter what tech they use I predict that, if they 
decide to join, they'll move to Qt in a year or 2 anyway ;-)


Same with Synfig -- GIMP might be harder, though Oyvind Kolas argued that GIMP 
isn't a Gnome application despite being hosted by Gnome in all respects years 
ago.

--
Boudewijn Rempt | http://www.krita.org, http://www.valdyas.org
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Cornelius Schumacher]

On Monday 08 February 2016 12:16:41 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> On Friday, February 05, 2016 05:00:28 PM Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> > 
> > So, how about
> > "KDE enables everyone to control their digital life without compromising
> > their  privacy."
> 
> That's getting really catchy!
> 
> Really useful feedback, thanks Ingo. I agree with the points you make.

Same here. This is what is resonating most with me from what I have seen in 
this thread. Thanks, Ingo. It captures what I perceive as the common ground of 
what we want to reach.

The exact wording could maybe be improved. But it has the right element.

"enables everyone" expresses that we are giving people access to technology, 
that we break down barriers, that we imagine a world where software freedom is 
the norm.

"control their digital life" captures the end user target and that it is about 
giving control to people. Again something which goes very well with the ideals 
of free software, but on a more general level.

"without compromising their privacy" might be a bit limited in the concrete 
mention of privacy, but it expresses that the world we want to reach is one 
where fundamental rights are respected, individuals are respected, and 
technology is used in a responsible way. I'm thinking of a "free society" 
here.

Having such a vision statement might not be for everyone, but I think this is 
ok. This is not about convincing anybody, but about expressing the common 
driver which already is there. I do think it's motivating, but I also think 
there are many other motivations and concrete reasons which bring people to 
KDE. In the end I feel they are compatible with a vision statement as Ingo 
expressed it and it actually describes the core of where we can go as a 
community.

-- 
Cornelius Schumacher 
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Cornelius Schumacher]

On Friday 05 February 2016 08:20:22 Martin Graesslin wrote:
> 
> Thus now my question: How will this vision provide us guidance for the next
> disruption? How will we be able to use this vision to be a leader in the
> next disruption? Please explain why you think that the vision will help in
> the next disruption. If you don't think that the vision is for that please
> also explain why you think that. E.g. if you think we shouldn't care about
> the next disruption, please explain the reasoning for it.

I'm not sure if disruption is the right target for us. It is a term mostly 
used in context of disrupting a commercial market. Sure the commercial market 
for desktops has been disrupted by mobile and other factors, it's hard to sell 
desktop software, Microsoft is looking hard for other business models, Apple 
is already giving away their software for free. But this is not affecting us 
in the same way, we don't lose the opportunity to make money, on the contrary, 
we actually gain an opportunity to provide desktop software, because we have a 
sustainable model how to produce this without a commercial market.

I'm all for innovation, creating new stuff, riding waves of new technology. 
But on the other hand there also is a lot of value in simply scratching your 
own itch, in focusing on bringing freedom to technology-wise established 
markets, and playing to our strengths.

I'm perfectly fine with a vision which provides me with a perspective to give 
me control and freedom of my own computing needs, and leave being the uber of 
mobile big data cloud containers to somebody else.

-- 
Cornelius Schumacher 
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Alexander Dymo]

On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 5:41 AM, Lydia Pintscher  wrote:
> The technology is something that does not belong into the vision.

Why? It would be strange for the tech organization/community like KDE,
IMHO of course.

PS: I reread the https://topnonprofits.com/examples/vision-statements/
list, and also looked at
http://www.lifehack.org/articles/work/20-sample-vision-statement-for-the-new-startup.html.
Most of them incorporate the core area of expertise of these
organizations into their vision.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Lydia Pintscher]

On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 9:12 PM, Torsten Rahn  wrote:
>
>> TikiWiki or Drupal or whatever then the vision ("Imagine a world in
>> which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all
>> knowledge. That's our commitment.") would stay untouched because
>
> Oh, so you guys have the duty to store the internet?
>
> SCNR ;-)

Actually! More than the internet if you take it to the extreme. Think
of all the knowledge in indigenous tribes for example.
http://www.slideshare.net/frimelle/increasing-access-to-free-and-open-knowledge-for-speakers-of-underserved-languages-on-wikipedia
has some interesting numbers on unequal access to knowledge on the
internet. (The author is my student.)
But more seriously: Wikimedia's vision doesn't say that all the
knowledge has to be with Wikimedia - just that it must be universally
and freely accessible.


Cheers
Lydia

-- 
Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher
KDE e.V. Board of Directors / KDE Community Working Group
http://kde.org - http://open-advice.org
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Martin Graesslin]

On Tuesday, February 9, 2016 8:40:07 AM CET David Edmundson wrote:
> I have two main questions. I'll make them as new threads.
> 
> KDE as a community currently has a clear unique selling point for new
> projects; Qt libraries, Qt expertise, and connections. A common thread that
> makes it worth being a community. We've seen this work in the past with
> existing Qt projects like gcompris, tupi coming to us for that reason.
> 
> With the unfocussed vision, it seems we lose that. My question therefore is
> is, what is our USP, and what benefit is there for any new project to join
> us?

By widening our scope we don't lose our Qt expertise. We still are the Qt 
experts. Similar we didn't lose our Linux/Unix knowledge by supporting Windows 
and OSX and we don't lose our X11 knowledge by going Wayland.

Personally I also disagree about Qt being a common thread that makes it worth 
being a community. When I joined KDE I didn't know Qt, I hardly knew C++. The 
fact that it was Qt was pretty much irrelevant for me and certainly not the 
reason why I sticked around.

> what is our USP

do we have one currently? I don't think so. But from the vision I'd say 
creating free software which puts the end user in control of their digital 
life.

> what benefit is there for any new project to join us?

Those listed in the manifesto.

Cheers
Martin

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Kevin Ottens]

Hello,

Sorry, but there was a bait I couldn't resist here. :-)

On Tuesday, 9 February 2016 11:55:35 CET Marco Martin wrote:
> * "makes simple things easy" not sure about that, aren't simple things
> already supposed to be easy? :p (makes doing things easy?)

In fact not, simple things can be terribly difficult to achieve (complexity vs 
difficulty spectrums). I think the proposed phrasing points it out well:
 * simple vs complex;
 * easy vs possible.

That being said, I wonder how many people will fall for it like you did here. 
Most people tend to conflate simple with easy and complex with difficult.

Cheers.
-- 
Kévin Ottens, http://ervin.ipsquad.net

KDAB - proud supporter of KDE, http://www.kdab.com



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Sebastian Kügler]

On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 08:40:07 AM David Edmundson wrote:
> With the unfocussed vision,

Unfocused?

One vision focuses on technologies (Qt, GUI, etc.), one on values (Freedom, 
user control, privacy). Both provide focus, just very different ones.

A vision is a goal, a desired result. That's why I think focusing on 
technologies is weak: technology is a means to an end, what we want to achieve 
with our software are the focus point of "Vision 1": Freedom, user control, 
privacy.

As Martin said very well already: By defining our goals not in terms of 
technology but in terms of values and principles, we don't lose the technology 
aspect, we are still experts in Qt, have awesome libraries, a history unlike 
anyone else, and a community around it.
-- 
sebas

http://www.kde.org | http://vizZzion.org
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[David Edmundson]

I have two main questions. I'll make them as new threads.

KDE as a community currently has a clear unique selling point for new
projects; Qt libraries, Qt expertise, and connections. A common thread that
makes it worth being a community. We've seen this work in the past with
existing Qt projects like gcompris, tupi coming to us for that reason.

With the unfocussed vision, it seems we lose that. My question therefore is
is, what is our USP, and what benefit is there for any new project to join
us?
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Marco Martin]

On Wednesday 03 February 2016 10:10:27 Lydia Pintscher wrote:

> 
> The first draft reads as follows:
> "KDE, through the creation of Free software, enables users to control
> their digital life. KDE software enables privacy, makes simple things
> easy and complex scenarios possible while crossing device boundaries."

* "KDE software" -> "software by KDE?"
* "makes simple things easy" not sure about that, aren't simple things already 
supposed to be easy? :p (makes doing things easy?)

-- 
Marco Martin
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Marco Martin]

On Tuesday 09 February 2016 12:19:54 Kevin Ottens wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Sorry, but there was a bait I couldn't resist here. :-)
> 
> On Tuesday, 9 February 2016 11:55:35 CET Marco Martin wrote:
> > * "makes simple things easy" not sure about that, aren't simple things
> > already supposed to be easy? :p (makes doing things easy?)
> 
> In fact not, simple things can be terribly difficult to achieve (complexity
> vs difficulty spectrums). I think the proposed phrasing points it out well:
> * simple vs complex;
>  * easy vs possible.
> 
> That being said, I wonder how many people will fall for it like you did
> here. Most people tend to conflate simple with easy and complex with
> difficult.

yep you are right, I do wonder if there is a problem in phrasing here tough

-- 
Marco Martin
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Lydia Pintscher]

On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 9:40 AM, David Edmundson
 wrote:
> I have two main questions. I'll make them as new threads.
>
> KDE as a community currently has a clear unique selling point for new
> projects; Qt libraries, Qt expertise, and connections. A common thread that
> makes it worth being a community. We've seen this work in the past with
> existing Qt projects like gcompris, tupi coming to us for that reason.

In addition to the answers Martin and sebas already gave there is
another important point: The technology is something that does not
belong into the vision. It can go into the mission statement because
it is a part of how we get to where we want to go. It is not the place
we want to go.


Cheers
Lydia

-- 
Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher
KDE e.V. Board of Directors / KDE Community Working Group
http://kde.org - http://open-advice.org
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Lydia Pintscher]

Thanks everyone for the comments and discussion so far. Please keep
them coming. We'll sit down to mingle the feedback into the second
draft this weekend.


Cheers
Lydia
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Riccardo Iaconelli]

On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 09:24:43 PM Lydia Pintscher wrote:
> But more seriously: Wikimedia's vision doesn't say that all the
> knowledge has to be with Wikimedia - just that it must be universally
> and freely accessible.

... which is, incidentally, the reason why they have been helping us at 
WikiToLearn a lot.

Bye,
-Riccardo

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Alexander Neundorf]

On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 11:59:26 Marco Martin wrote:
...
> I fear a part of the explanation is very simple and very sad...
> the first time around every participant was young and willing to ride the
> change, today several generations are living together in KDE

here is the mail from Matthias Ettrich:
https://www.kde.org/documentation/posting.txt

This is from 1996. Windows 95 existed. Matthias suggested to use Qt, so 
there'll be a common widget set, and he proposed to develop (from the mail) a 
panel, a file manager, a mail client, a text editor and an image viewer. 
Nothing of that was new or disruptive in 1996, what was new was to do that as 
free software for UNIX/X11. Very concrete goals with a clear technical choice.

Alex

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Alexander Neundorf]

On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 10:41:07 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
...
> As Martin said very well already: By defining our goals not in terms of
> technology but in terms of values and principles, we don't lose the
> technology aspect, we are still experts in Qt, 

sure we'll lose it long-term.
If we don't focus at all on Qt, won't KDE become a mixture of projects using 
many different technologies ? This is how I understand the goal of this draft.
If that's so, then Qt will only be one among many in KDE, not KDEs main 
competence anymore.

Alex

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Sebastian Kügler]

On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 23:07:56 Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 10:41:07 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> ...
> 
> > As Martin said very well already: By defining our goals not in terms of
> > technology but in terms of values and principles, we don't lose the
> > technology aspect, we are still experts in Qt, 
> 
> sure we'll lose it long-term.
> If we don't focus at all on Qt,

Nobody says that we don't focus at all on Qt. Our software is built around Qt, 
and nobody wants to change that. It's because Qt is an excellent solution to 
many of our problems, it just isn't a goal in itself, but a tool.

> won't KDE become a mixture of projects
> using  many different technologies ? This is how I understand the goal of
> this draft. If that's so, then Qt will only be one among many in KDE, not
> KDEs main competence anymore.
-- 
sebas

Sebastian Kügler|http://vizZzion.org| http://kde.org

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Alexander Neundorf]

On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 20:37:29 Lydia Pintscher wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 8:01 PM, Alexander Dymo  wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 5:41 AM, Lydia Pintscher  wrote:
> >> The technology is something that does not belong into the vision.
> > 
> > Why? It would be strange for the tech organization/community like KDE,
> > IMHO of course.
> 
> You cut off the part of my email with the reasoning: "It can go into
> the mission statement because it is a part of how we get to where we
> want to go. It is not the place we want to go." Or in other words it
> is too specific for a vision. 

To me, this vision draft presented here is also very broad.
Actually I think that only very few Free software projects would disagree to 
it. I mean, it is not too different from the ideas which motivate the GPL.
Do you have already a "mission" draft at hand, so it becomes more clear what 
you have in mind ?

Alex

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Alexander Neundorf]

Hi,

I'll also start a new sub-thread.
Since this vision draft is very broad: what kind of projects do you consider 
to be covered by this vision draft ?
Or, the other way round, are there projects, or types of projects which you 
see as not part of this vision ?

Alex

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Torsten Rahn]

> TikiWiki or Drupal or whatever then the vision ("Imagine a world in
> which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all
> knowledge. That's our commitment.") would stay untouched because

Oh, so you guys have the duty to store the internet?

SCNR ;-)
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Clemens Toennies]

On Feb 9, 2016 11:42 PM, "Sebastian Kügler"  wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 23:07:56 Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 10:41:07 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> > ...
> >
> > > As Martin said very well already: By defining our goals not in terms
of
> > > technology but in terms of values and principles, we don't lose the
> > > technology aspect, we are still experts in Qt,
> >
> > sure we'll lose it long-term.
> > If we don't focus at all on Qt,
>
> Nobody says that we don't focus at all on Qt. Our software is built
around Qt,
> and nobody wants to change that. It's because Qt is an excellent solution
to
> many of our problems, it just isn't a goal in itself, but a tool.

Provoking thought:
With the recent shift of Gnome to exclusivity (leading to mint x-apps,
ubuntu forks), what if more and more GTK applications would become KDE
projects because of shared values inside an independent, welcoming
community?
Maybe then with everyone working closer together, we would be able to
overcome the rift still dividing the linux enduser technologies when people
start to sit on the same tables?

Greetings, Clemens.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Martin Graesslin]

On Tuesday, February 9, 2016 11:15:38 PM CET Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 20:37:29 Lydia Pintscher wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 8:01 PM, Alexander Dymo  wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 5:41 AM, Lydia Pintscher  wrote:
> > >> The technology is something that does not belong into the vision.
> > > 
> > > Why? It would be strange for the tech organization/community like KDE,
> > > IMHO of course.
> > 
> > You cut off the part of my email with the reasoning: "It can go into
> > the mission statement because it is a part of how we get to where we
> > want to go. It is not the place we want to go." Or in other words it
> > is too specific for a vision.
> 
> To me, this vision draft presented here is also very broad.
> Actually I think that only very few Free software projects would disagree to
> it. I mean, it is not too different from the ideas which motivate the GPL.

Personally I like that. I think it's awesome if we have a vision which would 
in extrem allow GNOME to say, hey let's join KDE.

> Do you have already a "mission" draft at hand, so it becomes more clear
> what you have in mind ?

Maybe first vision then mission?

Cheers
Martin

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Sebastian Kügler]

On Friday, February 05, 2016 05:00:28 PM Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> On Wednesday 03 February 2016 10:10:27 Lydia Pintscher wrote:
> > The first draft reads as follows:
> > "KDE, through the creation of Free software,
> 
> "through the creation of Free software" sounds like (part of) a mission 
> statement to me. I'd leave it out of the vision statement.
> 
> > enables users
> 
> IMO "users" is too technical as term for a vision. I suggest to replace it 
> with "everyone".
> 
> > to control their digital life.
> 
> I like this.
> 
> > KDE software enables privacy,
> 
> Yes!
> 
> > makes simple things easy and complex scenarios possible
> 
> To me this sounds very not-saying-anything in a complicated way. Also, I
> think  it superfluous because it's already contained in "enables [...] to
> control their digital life".
> 
> > while crossing device boundaries."
> 
> While it may be nice to mention this it's probably better moved to the
> mission  statement.
> 
> 
> So, how about
> "KDE enables everyone to control their digital life without compromising
> their  privacy."

That's getting really catchy!

Really useful feedback, thanks Ingo. I agree with the points you make.
-- 
sebas

http://www.kde.org | http://vizZzion.org

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Martin Graesslin]

On Friday, February 5, 2016 10:03:27 AM CET Lydia Pintscher wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Martin Graesslin  wrote:
> > On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 10:10:27 AM CET Lydia Pintscher wrote:
> >> The first draft reads as follows:
> >> "KDE, through the creation of Free software, enables users to control
> >> their digital life. KDE software enables privacy, makes simple things
> >> easy and complex scenarios possible while crossing device boundaries."
> > 
> > In the world of IT we see again and again the introduction of disruptive
> > technologies which change the field of computing. In the past KDE as a
> > community mastered some of them great, some of them badly. When KDE
> > started
> > the world was in the middle of the disruption known as the Internet. KDE
> > handled it great. Today basically every person connecting to the Internet
> > is using a KDE technology for that.
> > 
> > The next disruption "mobile" wasn't handled well, though. We were years
> > too
> > late and still haven't really got there. From our hundreds of applications
> > only 3 are available on the most important distribution channel for mobile
> > application. We clearly missed this disruption.
> > 
> > Currently we are again in an disruptive stage. We have the cloud and
> > social
> > networks. Again we are moving slowly and are not adapting to the
> > disruptive
> > change. But we had good cards for cloud with e.g. ownCloud. Overall I
> > don't
> > see any strategy on how to move our applications into the cloud and how to
> > integrate the cloud better. We were great in the Internet age, but are not
> > catching up. Similar the social net is not integrated at all into our
> > products. Thus I would conclude that we are missing this disruption just
> > like the last one.
> > 
> > Personally I think that we missed them because we didn't have a clear
> > vision on where to go and were too focused on the good old things.
> > 
> > Thus now my question: How will this vision provide us guidance for the
> > next
> > disruption? How will we be able to use this vision to be a leader in the
> > next disruption? Please explain why you think that the vision will help
> > in the next disruption. If you don't think that the vision is for that
> > please also explain why you think that. E.g. if you think we shouldn't
> > care about the next disruption, please explain the reasoning for it.
> 
> That's an excellent question, Martin!
> 
> I think we absolutely should care about the next disruption. Let's
> take a look at what Wikipedia has to say about disruptive innovation:
> "A disruptive innovation is an innovation that creates a new market
> and value network and eventually disrupts an existing market and value
> network, displacing established market leaders and alliances. The term
> was defined and phenomenon analyzed by Clayton M. Christensen
> beginning in 1995. More recent sources also include "significant
> societal impact" as an aspect of disruptive innovation." I think this
> last part is crucial to answer your question.
> Innovation (disruptive in the true sense or not) after innovation we
> see over the last years makes our digital life easier, more things
> possible and social connections across cultural and social barriers
> more easy and immediate. At the same time we see two very disturbing
> trends: technology gets more closed - at least the ones adopted on a
> large scale by consumers and we more willingly accept being spied on
> for our own or other's perceived good. We seem to more readily accept
> that the book on your Kindle can't easily be shared with your friend -
> or that it might vanish the next day. We seem more ready to accept
> that we can't repair our own car anymore. This has a huge impact on
> society. So how do I see KDE fit into this? I believe in two ways.
> 1) We are there to provide a viable and even better alternative for
> every-day people. We need to show that we can have all the benefits
> technology brings us while not having to give up control and
> sovereignty. This starts on your personal devices you use every day to
> do work and enjoy life.
> 2) We need to be there to show people that they can tinker. We need to
> show them that they don't have to accept closed systems but that they
> can actually meaningfully alter their personal world and how they
> interact with the rest of the world. The shift towards more and more
> closed systems in consumer technology is only going to change if
> people demand it. We need to remind them that they can.

Thank you for the well elaborated answer!

Cheers
Martin


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Ingo Klöcker]

On Wednesday 03 February 2016 10:10:27 Lydia Pintscher wrote:
> The first draft reads as follows:
> "KDE, through the creation of Free software,

"through the creation of Free software" sounds like (part of) a mission 
statement to me. I'd leave it out of the vision statement.


> enables users

IMO "users" is too technical as term for a vision. I suggest to replace it 
with "everyone".


> to control their digital life.

I like this.


> KDE software enables privacy,

Yes!


> makes simple things easy and complex scenarios possible

To me this sounds very not-saying-anything in a complicated way. Also, I think 
it superfluous because it's already contained in "enables [...] to control 
their digital life".


> while crossing device boundaries."

While it may be nice to mention this it's probably better moved to the mission 
statement.


So, how about
"KDE enables everyone to control their digital life without compromising their 
privacy."


Regards,
Ingo

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Lydia Pintscher]

On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Martin Graesslin  wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 10:10:27 AM CET Lydia Pintscher wrote:
>> The first draft reads as follows:
>> "KDE, through the creation of Free software, enables users to control
>> their digital life. KDE software enables privacy, makes simple things
>> easy and complex scenarios possible while crossing device boundaries."
>
> In the world of IT we see again and again the introduction of disruptive
> technologies which change the field of computing. In the past KDE as a
> community mastered some of them great, some of them badly. When KDE started
> the world was in the middle of the disruption known as the Internet. KDE
> handled it great. Today basically every person connecting to the Internet is
> using a KDE technology for that.
>
> The next disruption "mobile" wasn't handled well, though. We were years too
> late and still haven't really got there. From our hundreds of applications
> only 3 are available on the most important distribution channel for mobile
> application. We clearly missed this disruption.
>
> Currently we are again in an disruptive stage. We have the cloud and social
> networks. Again we are moving slowly and are not adapting to the disruptive
> change. But we had good cards for cloud with e.g. ownCloud. Overall I don't
> see any strategy on how to move our applications into the cloud and how to
> integrate the cloud better. We were great in the Internet age, but are not
> catching up. Similar the social net is not integrated at all into our
> products. Thus I would conclude that we are missing this disruption just like
> the last one.
>
> Personally I think that we missed them because we didn't have a clear vision
> on where to go and were too focused on the good old things.
>
> Thus now my question: How will this vision provide us guidance for the next
> disruption? How will we be able to use this vision to be a leader in the next
> disruption? Please explain why you think that the vision will help in the next
> disruption. If you don't think that the vision is for that please also explain
> why you think that. E.g. if you think we shouldn't care about the next
> disruption, please explain the reasoning for it.

That's an excellent question, Martin!

I think we absolutely should care about the next disruption. Let's
take a look at what Wikipedia has to say about disruptive innovation:
"A disruptive innovation is an innovation that creates a new market
and value network and eventually disrupts an existing market and value
network, displacing established market leaders and alliances. The term
was defined and phenomenon analyzed by Clayton M. Christensen
beginning in 1995. More recent sources also include "significant
societal impact" as an aspect of disruptive innovation." I think this
last part is crucial to answer your question.
Innovation (disruptive in the true sense or not) after innovation we
see over the last years makes our digital life easier, more things
possible and social connections across cultural and social barriers
more easy and immediate. At the same time we see two very disturbing
trends: technology gets more closed - at least the ones adopted on a
large scale by consumers and we more willingly accept being spied on
for our own or other's perceived good. We seem to more readily accept
that the book on your Kindle can't easily be shared with your friend -
or that it might vanish the next day. We seem more ready to accept
that we can't repair our own car anymore. This has a huge impact on
society. So how do I see KDE fit into this? I believe in two ways.
1) We are there to provide a viable and even better alternative for
every-day people. We need to show that we can have all the benefits
technology brings us while not having to give up control and
sovereignty. This starts on your personal devices you use every day to
do work and enjoy life.
2) We need to be there to show people that they can tinker. We need to
show them that they don't have to accept closed systems but that they
can actually meaningfully alter their personal world and how they
interact with the rest of the world. The shift towards more and more
closed systems in consumer technology is only going to change if
people demand it. We need to remind them that they can.


Cheers
Lydia

-- 
Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher
KDE e.V. Board of Directors / KDE Community Working Group
http://kde.org - http://open-advice.org
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Martin Graesslin]

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 10:10:27 AM CET Lydia Pintscher wrote:
> The first draft reads as follows:
> "KDE, through the creation of Free software, enables users to control
> their digital life. KDE software enables privacy, makes simple things
> easy and complex scenarios possible while crossing device boundaries."

In the world of IT we see again and again the introduction of disruptive 
technologies which change the field of computing. In the past KDE as a 
community mastered some of them great, some of them badly. When KDE started 
the world was in the middle of the disruption known as the Internet. KDE 
handled it great. Today basically every person connecting to the Internet is 
using a KDE technology for that.

The next disruption "mobile" wasn't handled well, though. We were years too 
late and still haven't really got there. From our hundreds of applications 
only 3 are available on the most important distribution channel for mobile 
application. We clearly missed this disruption.

Currently we are again in an disruptive stage. We have the cloud and social 
networks. Again we are moving slowly and are not adapting to the disruptive 
change. But we had good cards for cloud with e.g. ownCloud. Overall I don't 
see any strategy on how to move our applications into the cloud and how to 
integrate the cloud better. We were great in the Internet age, but are not 
catching up. Similar the social net is not integrated at all into our 
products. Thus I would conclude that we are missing this disruption just like 
the last one.

Personally I think that we missed them because we didn't have a clear vision 
on where to go and were too focused on the good old things.

Thus now my question: How will this vision provide us guidance for the next 
disruption? How will we be able to use this vision to be a leader in the next 
disruption? Please explain why you think that the vision will help in the next 
disruption. If you don't think that the vision is for that please also explain 
why you think that. E.g. if you think we shouldn't care about the next 
disruption, please explain the reasoning for it.

Thank you!
Martin

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Adriaan de Groot]

On Wednesday 03 February 2016 10:10:27 Lydia Pintscher wrote:
> The first draft reads as follows:
> "KDE, through the creation of Free software, enables users to control
> their digital life. KDE software enables privacy, makes simple things
> easy and complex scenarios possible while crossing device boundaries."

Just a quick question: this one paragraph above is the vision-statement from 
this vision-group? With the rest of your message explaining how various 
existing parts of KDE (as in, some specific applications, the Plasma Desktop, 
various activities that the KDE community organizes, underlying technologies 
and additional KDE projects) fit into that vision?

I'm asking this because I want to know what I should put into my vision-ometer 
(a contraption that measures the visionariness) and what (same) text I should 
compare to any other vision-statement that is proposed.

[ade]
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Lydia Pintscher]

On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:10 PM, Adriaan de Groot  wrote:
> On Wednesday 03 February 2016 10:10:27 Lydia Pintscher wrote:
>> The first draft reads as follows:
>> "KDE, through the creation of Free software, enables users to control
>> their digital life. KDE software enables privacy, makes simple things
>> easy and complex scenarios possible while crossing device boundaries."
>
> Just a quick question: this one paragraph above is the vision-statement from
> this vision-group? With the rest of your message explaining how various
> existing parts of KDE (as in, some specific applications, the Plasma Desktop,
> various activities that the KDE community organizes, underlying technologies
> and additional KDE projects) fit into that vision?

Yes exactly.

> I'm asking this because I want to know what I should put into my vision-ometer
> (a contraption that measures the visionariness) and what (same) text I should
> compare to any other vision-statement that is proposed.

I like the concept of the vision-ometer ;-)


Cheers
Lydia

-- 
Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher
KDE e.V. Board of Directors / KDE Community Working Group
http://kde.org - http://open-advice.org
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Adriaan de Groot]

On Wednesday 03 February 2016 23:13:24 Lydia Pintscher wrote:
> > I'm asking this because I want to know what I should put into my
> > vision-ometer (a contraption that measures the visionariness) and what
> > (same) text I should compare to any other vision-statement that is
> > proposed.
> 
> I like the concept of the vision-ometer

I like the concept too, because it could tell us "vision text X has 3.7uC and 
17R" (uniCorns and Realisms, respectively -- or make up your own units). But 
I'm not sure it would be easily marketable. Regardless, I will use my own 
private visionometer and measure the two (or more?) documents; I hope I can 
describe the axes along which I measure and the units used once I've read and 
actually considered the texts.

I'm not going to respond in full until friday at the earliest: I think these 
documents deserve mulling over, and I'm not going to react quickly -- no gut 
reactions, that is -- to either.

[ade]
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community