Re: [kde-community] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?

[Boudewijn Rempt]

On Wed, 10 Feb 2016, Vishesh Handa wrote:


On Feb 8, 2016 11:51, "Jonathan Riddell"  wrote:
>
> I also heard a suggestion from Vishesh that projects like Amarok
> shouldn't be allowed in GSoC because they are not very active.  It
> seems nonsense to block projects from having activity on grounds that
> they are not very active.

I stand by this.

If a project has no developers who actively contribute to it, putting students 
on it with the hope that they
will take care of it, is too optimistic.



I don't want to argue for or against concrete examples, but I do agree that 
it's not fair to the students to tease them witha project that might sound 
cool, but hasn't got mentors available. And if there aren't developers, how can 
there be mentors?

--
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] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?

[Vishesh Handa]

On Feb 8, 2016 11:51, "Jonathan Riddell"  wrote:
>
> I also heard a suggestion from Vishesh that projects like Amarok
> shouldn't be allowed in GSoC because they are not very active.  It
> seems nonsense to block projects from having activity on grounds that
> they are not very active.

I stand by this.

If a project has no developers who actively contribute to it, putting
students on it with the hope that they will take care of it, is too
optimistic.

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

Re: [kde-community] Vision, mission and manifesto - what is their definition and purpose?

[Alexander Neundorf]

On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 23:55:59 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> On Dienstag, 9. Februar 2016 23:35:38 CET Alexander Neundorf wrote:
...
> > This is maybe an important detail.
> > The results of "Evolve KDE" (https://evolve.kde.org/surveyresults.pdf)
> > recommend to "Develop a vision, strategy and focus".
> > Are we sure we are searching for a vision for the organization (isn't that
> > quite close to the manifesto ?) and not for a vision for the products
> > created by the organization ?
> 
> Good question! Here is a bit of history on this:
> 
> In the past, the KDE usability team (namely Björn, Heiko and I) have at
> least twice suggested to create a common vision for KDE's products.
> This approach has received mostly negative comments every time, with the
> argument that there is far too much diversity among existing KDE projects to
> define a common product vision which is still useful, and that individual
> product visions would be much more helpful.

I can remember having read about that somewhere...
As you have seen, the argument that KDE is so diverse has been brought here 
too several times, but from what I know there is still very much in common.

Maybe your KDE product vision effort should be brought into scope again when 
we are talking now here about a vision etc. ? Do you have some pointers ?
 
...
> > Also, what do you think about the relation between vision and mission ?
> 
> When I joined the "vision team", my original proposal was to only define a
> mission, because I felt that visions make more sense for products than for
> communities.
> However, Lydia convinced me that having a common vision for the future to
> work towards can have more positive effect on a sense of purpose and
> motivation than only defining a strategy, so I agreed to define a vision
> first and then derive the mission from that.

That's just Lydias opinion. ;-)
No, seriously, in the last weeks several people contacted me in private email 
and expressed that they are not exactly happy, some even seriously frustrated  
with the strong emphasis on non-technical topics in KDE in the last few years, 
and they would prefer to get some more emphasis on technology and products 
back.
This (obviously) includes me. Maybe this also includes many of the people who 
said "vision, strategy and focus" in the evolve-survey ?

Sorry to be blunt: for me, a catchy one-sentence-vision statement *alone* 
won't impress me, everyone has one today. It won't give me a sense of purpose 
or anything. It's just a catchy phrase. Maybe I'm too old for that.

Anyway, I think vision and mission should be defined together, otherwise we'll 
get ugly discussions once we have decided on the vision, and get into mission-
land.

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 - an alternative draft for discussion

[Alexander Dymo]

> So a vision which would ensure that also future technologies could be served,
> would not harm that? Let's just not close doors.

Sure. But let's also not spread thin. Do you think it makes sense to
find a middle ground between two proposals?
___
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] Vision, mission and manifesto - what is their definition and purpose?

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

On Mittwoch, 10. Februar 2016 21:42:31 CET Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > In the past, the KDE usability team (namely Björn, Heiko and I) have at
> > least twice suggested to create a common vision for KDE's products.
> > This approach has received mostly negative comments every time, with the
> > argument that there is far too much diversity among existing KDE projects
> > to define a common product vision which is still useful, and that
> > individual product visions would be much more helpful.
> 
> I can remember having read about that somewhere...
> As you have seen, the argument that KDE is so diverse has been brought here
> too several times, but from what I know there is still very much in common.
> 
> Maybe your KDE product vision effort should be brought into scope again when
> we are talking now here about a vision etc. ? Do you have some pointers ?

I have given up on this effort, to be honest. The community felt that such a 
thing didn't make sense for them the last two times we proposed it, I don't 
see why this would have changed now. I don't want to force anybody.
I won't keep you from suggesting it again, of course, and if it turns out that 
the community now wants that for some reason, I'm happy to throw my experience 
with creating product visions in the ring.
However, you won't see me trying the same thing a third time after it failed 
twice.

> > > Also, what do you think about the relation between vision and mission ?
> > 
> > When I joined the "vision team", my original proposal was to only define a
> > mission, because I felt that visions make more sense for products than for
> > communities.
> > However, Lydia convinced me that having a common vision for the future to
> > work towards can have more positive effect on a sense of purpose and
> > motivation than only defining a strategy, so I agreed to define a vision
> > first and then derive the mission from that.
> 
> That's just Lydias opinion. ;-)

It was originally Lydia's opinion (based on her experience with Wikimedia's 
success), but now that she convinced me and the the other members of the team 
behind "Draft A", it is our common opinion.

> No, seriously, in the last weeks several people contacted me in private
> email and expressed that they are not exactly happy, some even seriously
> frustrated with the strong emphasis on non-technical topics in KDE in the
> last few years, and they would prefer to get some more emphasis on
> technology and products back.
> This (obviously) includes me. Maybe this also includes many of the people
> who said "vision, strategy and focus" in the evolve-survey ?
> 
> Sorry to be blunt: for me, a catchy one-sentence-vision statement *alone*
> won't impress me, everyone has one today. It won't give me a sense of
> purpose or anything. It's just a catchy phrase. Maybe I'm too old for that.

A vision statement alone doesn't do much, either. A mission is needed to turn 
vision into strategy.

> Anyway, I think vision and mission should be defined together, otherwise
> we'll get ugly discussions once we have decided on the vision, and get into
> mission- land.

The discussions cannot be avoided (though I believe they don't have to be 
ugly!), but it seems to me that the two "camps" are much closer in their 
ultimate goal than they are in what they see as the best strategy to achieve 
it.
So what is bad about first declaring what we agree on and then debate on the 
level where we actually disagree?
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community