Re: Re: naming the next major release
On Thursday 05 September 2013 13:25:33 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: > On 20.08.2013 07:06, Martin Graesslin wrote: > > I do want to promote KWin for the usage in LXDE/Razor as in the next > > version we will hardly have any build-time dependencies from frameworks > > higher than tier1. I'm concerned that a generic name "Plasma" would work > > against that as it would be difficult to communicate that although being > > part of Plasma not being part of Plasma. If someone has a good idea on > > how to properly communicate this without being confusing (especially for > > users who want the lightweight aspect of LXDE and Plasma is for people in > > that user group unfortunately the definition of bloat) I consider this as > > a non-blocking issue for the naming. > > It's not called "Plasma KWin", is it? We also use to call it "Plasma Window Manager and Compositor" as KWin is a rather technical name and not present anywhere in the UI except in DrKonqi. > I'd just market KWin as KWin to > other DEs. Yes, it also is part of Plasma, but you can get it as a > standalone window manager as well. The problem is not marketing to other DEs. They get the distinction. The problem is with the users. Yes that's not rational but that's how it is - just search for the blog post about LXDE with Qt is not bloated. > Besides, I don't think that calling > it "Plasma Workspaces" would help with that, anyway. You'd still have to > make clear that KWin can be used without the rest of the workspaces. That you can use it without Plasma Desktop is obvious. Any window manager can do that. If the name is "Plasma Workspaces" it's more clear that it's a set of multiple applications, while the name "Plasma" at least to me looks like it's just one coherent thing. Especially as that's how it is with our competitors: with Unity and GNOME Shell you get a non-dividable set of Window Manager and Desktop Shell. Anyway I don't want to create a meta-discussion about it. If the majority is for Plasma that's fine with me. In that case we just move KWin a layer down. Instead of being part of Plasma, Plasma depends on KWin. For us it doesn't change anything, but for the communication it's more clear. Cheers Martin signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On 19.08.2013 21:56, Aaron J. Seigo wrote: Hi... after seeing the Nth time that we don’t know if the next release will be called Plasma Workspaces 2 or something else, i’d like to find consensus on this point so we can move forward in communication with confidence. the first point that we’ve all been around a million times, but i will cover again for completeness: Do we need a single name for all the bits that go into our desktop shell? yes, we do. a) the PR reason: it is impossible to communicate clearly about “those 20 things that fit together but which all have different (and kooky) names” and for that reason it is very hard for people to identify with or understand such a product. b) the developers reason: it allows us to draw a clear line around the workspaces (desktop, netbook, active, etc.) and everything else KDE produces. this is key for broader use of our libraries (Frameworks 5) and our applications: when people don’t understand they aren’t connected to the “desktop platform” they don’t use our libraries or apps if they don’t use our desktop environment. c) the community reason: as has been said a number of times, many of us yearn for a greater sense of belonging in the workspace efforts. whether that is stuff like bluetooth, network integration, desktop wallet, panels, desktop layers, window management .. it all really belongs together in that it is written to be used together. to be usable together we need to work together. to work together we are helped by having a common identity. so we need a name we all share. the current working title has been “Plasma Workspaces 2". there are 3 parts to the PW2 name: 1. Plasma 2. Workspaces 3. ‘2’ so, one at a time: 1. Plasma is a brand that has already received a good amount of investment, and we need a distinct nomenclature from ‘KDE’. we can’t just use “Workspace” either, with the idea of using “KDE Workspaces” because then what do we call Desktop vs Netbook vs Tablet? if “KDEK Workspaces” were the name, then we’d end up with KDE Tablet Workspace which sounds dreadful and is completely non-descript. KDE Workspace Tablet is grammatically awkward to the point of being wrong in English. 2. “Workspaces”gives us a way to umbrella all the Plasma primary UX that we provide (desktop, netbook, mediacenter, tablet, ... whatever comes in future). that said, “Workspaces” is the least meaningful bit of the 3 words. without it we have just KDE Plasma. the reason we added Workspaces was to differentiate between the user products and the underlying technology. we do, however, refer to it as Plasma Desktop (no workspaces in there), Plasma Active, etc. “Workspaces” is also a word that most people do not know / understand until it is explained. this contributes to the weakness of this part of the nomenclature. it does allow us to say, however, things like “KDE Plasma Workspaces includes Plasma Destkop, Plasma Active ..” which rolls off the tongue nicely. however, we could do the same without making Workspaces a proper part of the name and just use it a regular noun in conjuction with the name “KDE Plasma”. this would result in phrasing like: “KDE’s Plasma workspaces come in Desktop, Netbook, Tablet and Mediacenter flavours...” “KDE’s Plasma provides user experiences for desktop, netbook, tablet, ..” given that we are moving to a “grand unified shell” approach where the different user experiences flow seamlessly from one to the next, it may make sense to drop the concept that there is such huge differentiation that they are the “Workspaces” and instead are just “Plasma” which happens to morph to fit the device. +1 for dropping Workspaces. It sounds way more technical and less cool than Plasma. 3. ‘2’ ... why “two” if this is version 5? well, libplasma is actually going to be version 6 iirc, so it isn’t the library. i also am not a big believer in branding after version numbers. neither are any of our proprietary competitors who have a lot more marketing and communications savvy than we tend to. ;) what i like about 2 is: * it communicates this is something after the first. it’s that whole “two point oh” thing, though hopefully less hype than, say, “web 2.0” ;) * it’s simple and direct * ‘2’ is a couple, and a couple is a nice human idea :) this is borne out by the “1, 2, many” pattern in many ancient languages. we know 1, we know 2, after that it’s just an abstract concept. How about dropping the number altogether? I think we just feel the need to add a number to it because it's so much different on a technical level. However, I keep reading that the switch between Plasma 4.X and the new Plasma is supposed to be hardly even noticeable for the end user. So why not just calling it "Plasma" and give each version a purely technical version number which is not used for marketing purposes? New iterations would just be announced as "The next version of Plasma". If we still feel we need to give it a different nam
Re: naming the next major release
On 20.08.2013 07:06, Martin Graesslin wrote: I do want to promote KWin for the usage in LXDE/Razor as in the next version we will hardly have any build-time dependencies from frameworks higher than tier1. I'm concerned that a generic name "Plasma" would work against that as it would be difficult to communicate that although being part of Plasma not being part of Plasma. If someone has a good idea on how to properly communicate this without being confusing (especially for users who want the lightweight aspect of LXDE and Plasma is for people in that user group unfortunately the definition of bloat) I consider this as a non-blocking issue for the naming. It's not called "Plasma KWin", is it? I'd just market KWin as KWin to other DEs. Yes, it also is part of Plasma, but you can get it as a standalone window manager as well. Besides, I don't think that calling it "Plasma Workspaces" would help with that, anyway. You'd still have to make clear that KWin can be used without the rest of the workspaces. We should also think about what the name would mean for bug reporting. We don't want that all bugs for everything what is in kde-workspaces nowadays ends up in the component plasma. True. we'd need a distinct name for only the shell. Again, though, I don't think distinguishing between "Plasma Workspaces" and "Plasma" (as in "the shell") would be much less confusing. So to avoid this confusion, I guess we'd either have to give the workspace (including KWin and everything) a completely different name or give the shell a different name (or at least a more specific name inside bugzilla). ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: Re: naming the next major release
On Friday 30 August 2013 19:44:40 Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > If we say that “KDE Plasma” makes “Plasma” too much “KDE”, then we are > creating a real problem for ourselves: nothing can use “KDE” in conjunction > with its project name since that too would suggest exclusivity. There's another thing into it: trademarks. There probably is a trademark somewhere for "Plasma", so just calling it Plasma could render into problems. But "KDE Plasma" will be just fine. Cheers Martin signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Friday, August 30, 2013 19:44:40 Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > If we say that “KDE Plasma” makes “Plasma” too much “KDE”, then we are > creating a real problem for ourselves +1. -- sebas http://www.kde.org | http://vizZzion.org | GPG Key ID: 9119 0EF9 ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Saturday, August 31, 2013 13:35:27 Marco Martin wrote: > The one thing that i would really love to get away with tough is replacng > the conception of "for" KDE (and therefore unusable everywhere else as > "KDE" was a different operating system altogether) with "by" KDE This is something some of us have been trying to make happen, and is really something that ought to be clear with the current branding approach. That was the reason we went through an exercise which resulted in the “Powered by” logo. I ran out of steam at the end of the branding exercise and there are probably many areas where this flawed “for KDE” phrasing persists. It does indeed need to transition to “by”. -- Aaron J. Seigo signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Friday 30 August 2013, Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > > Without KDE being a brand with value, we lose one of the larger reasons to > add your project to the KDE galaxy of products. > > We need to move “KDE” into the direction of being our “Toyota” or “Sony”. > Just because there is a Toyota Camry does not mean that Toyota only makes > Camrys. Just because there is a Sony Bravia doesn’t mean they only make > televisions with the Bravia brand. agreed. there are other open source projects that tried to do a similar thing (altough not exactly the same) apache and mozilla come to my mind. with varying degrees of success, probably for the same reason. in the case of mozilla firefox pretty much eclipses all the other mozilla projects, in the case of apache the http server still eclipses any other apache project, so it keeps being "the" apache... in KDE we are probably in a better position, since we have several big projects that can be instantly positioned as different products, like plasma, calligra, kdevelop.. under an umbrella brand (and probably is already happening, slowly) The one thing that i would really love to get away with tough is replacng the conception of "for" KDE (and therefore unusable everywhere else as "KDE" was a different operating system altogether) with "by" KDE Cheers, Marco Martin ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Friday, August 23, 2013 11:50:20 Marco Martin wrote: > On Thursday 22 August 2013 23:20:11 Giorgos Tsiapaliokas wrote: > > KDE, for instance the most references in plasma active are > > "Plasma Active" and not "KDE Plasma Active", but PA doesn't have any > > distance from KDE. I believe that projects take some distance > > from "KDE" when they stop referring to it and not when they remove the > > "KDE" word, but that is just me of course :) > > To me is the contrary,.. what is now plasma+kwin gets seenn by people as > "the" KDE This probably can not be done quite yet. I’m glad we’re slowly reaching that point .. but .. All of our investment in the first 10+ years was in the brand “KDE”. That brand still has a greater amount of value and we are under zero requirement to demote Plasma in a misguided attempt to make things more amenable to theoretical options that don’t even currently exist. If we say that “KDE Plasma” makes “Plasma” too much “KDE”, then we are creating a real problem for ourselves: nothing can use “KDE” in conjunction with its project name since that too would suggest exclusivity. That’s utterly the wrong direction as it precludes KDE ever being a true umbrella brand. Without KDE being a brand with value, we lose one of the larger reasons to add your project to the KDE galaxy of products. We need to move “KDE” into the direction of being our “Toyota” or “Sony”. Just because there is a Toyota Camry does not mean that Toyota only makes Camrys. Just because there is a Sony Bravia doesn’t mean they only make televisions with the Bravia brand. Instead of shying away from “KDE Foo” we ought to instead be broadening its usage. This will do two things: * remove (slowly) the incorrect perception that KDE implies exclusivity * continue to invest in the KDE brand to benefit of all KDE projects -- Aaron J. Seigo signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
Hello to all, > To me is the contrary,.. what is now plasma+kwin gets seenn by people as > "the" > KDE > > if becomes just "Plasma", then become "a" desktop by KDE, not "the" KDE > desktop, would be more a normal citizen, > making room for instance Razor+Lxde to become another desktop by KDE +1 +1 for "Plasma", without "KDE". Regards, Antonis ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Thursday 22 August 2013 23:20:11 Giorgos Tsiapaliokas wrote: > KDE, for instance the most references in plasma active are > "Plasma Active" and not "KDE Plasma Active", but PA doesn't have any > distance from KDE. I believe that projects take some distance > from "KDE" when they stop referring to it and not when they remove the > "KDE" word, but that is just me of course :) To me is the contrary,.. what is now plasma+kwin gets seenn by people as "the" KDE if becomes just "Plasma", then become "a" desktop by KDE, not "the" KDE desktop, would be more a normal citizen, making room for instance Razor+Lxde to become another desktop by KDE -- Marco Martin ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Wednesday, August 21, 2013 20:40:09 Valorie Zimmerman wrote: > audience, such as the KDE-Community list. KDE-devel, KDE-core-devel and > KDE-Promo are some of the other possibilities to at least ping about a such > an important conversation happening. Yes, I have a purposeful habit of doing exactly that. We take very few Big Decisions of this sort without consulting the wider KDE community after we’ve had reasonable discussion here (so we sound like we know what we’re talking about ;) but before committing (publicly or to ourselves). .. and I haven’t dropped this thread, I’ve just been stupid busy with Chinese hardware, Canadian sons and Swiss daughters this week :) I’ll catch up with round 2 of my thoughts next week. Thank you to everyone who has weighed in so far, I’m starting to see threads of consensus already and I resonate strongly with a lot of what has been written by you already .. cool :) -- Aaron J. Seigo signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On 22 August 2013 21:26, David Edmundson wrote: > One thing that wasn't clear to me on the original proposals and has just > been mentioned by Giorgos is the prefix "KDE". > > KDE is not just "the community" but also "an umbrella brand for the > technology created by the KDE community" [0]. > I have heard other people make comments about how "Plasma is trying to > distance itself from the KDE community". I don't agree with those people, > but we shouldn't fuel that fire. Displaying that it is part of the KDE > umbrella is IMHO important. > When I said lets remove the "KDE" from "KDE Plasma" was in order to emphasize that KDE is the community. TBH I don't believe that by removing the "KDE", plasma is taking some distance from KDE. Also there are a lot of projects inside KDE which aren't using the "KDE" word and they don't take any distance from KDE, for instance the most references in plasma active are "Plasma Active" and not "KDE Plasma Active", but PA doesn't have any distance from KDE. I believe that projects take some distance from "KDE" when they stop referring to it and not when they remove the "KDE" word, but that is just me of course :) -- Giorgos Tsiapaliokas (terietor) terietor.org ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
My thoughts below. - Dropping the term "workspace": Seems sensible to me. It even seems this was the original intention [0]. - Calling it version 2. This makes a lot of sense, having a software compilation of KDE Plasma 5.x and KDE Applications 5.y, where x and y are different would be very very confusing. One thing that wasn't clear to me on the original proposals and has just been mentioned by Giorgos is the prefix "KDE". KDE is not just "the community" but also "an umbrella brand for the technology created by the KDE community" [0]. I have heard other people make comments about how "Plasma is trying to distance itself from the KDE community". I don't agree with those people, but we shouldn't fuel that fire. Displaying that it is part of the KDE umbrella is IMHO important. [0] http://dot.kde.org/2009/11/24/repositioning-kde-brand ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
Hello, with the "chaotic" nature of (future) release cycles for individual components the "date version number" format (for example "2013.08") is probably a good idea :) If I am not mistaken it was actually you (Martin G.) who initially suggested that :) On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 7:50 PM, Martin Graesslin wrote: > On Wednesday 21 August 2013 20:38:05 Martin Graesslin wrote: > > On Monday 19 August 2013 21:56:35 Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > > > Other proposals, ideas, tweaks to the above most welcome, but let’s > try to > > > come to a consensus on this matter before the end of this month. > > > > another idea: let's drop the version number completely and only use it > > internally (bugtracker, libs, etc.). > and yet another idea: code names instead of release numbers. And as we have > such nice codenames all over our code base (hello Corona) I would suggest > code > names out of the field of Physics/Science e.g. > * Plasma Higgs-Boson > > Cheers > Martin > > P.S. and that would give us a wonderful opportunity to bike-shed about a > name > each other month ;-) > ___ > Plasma-devel mailing list > Plasma-devel@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel > > ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Wednesday 21 August 2013 20:38:05 Martin Graesslin wrote: > On Monday 19 August 2013 21:56:35 Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > > Other proposals, ideas, tweaks to the above most welcome, but let’s try to > > come to a consensus on this matter before the end of this month. > > another idea: let's drop the version number completely and only use it > internally (bugtracker, libs, etc.). and yet another idea: code names instead of release numbers. And as we have such nice codenames all over our code base (hello Corona) I would suggest code names out of the field of Physics/Science e.g. * Plasma Higgs-Boson Cheers Martin P.S. and that would give us a wonderful opportunity to bike-shed about a name each other month ;-) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Thursday 22 August 2013 20:36:24 Giorgos Tsiapaliokas wrote: > Hello, > > On 21 August 2013 12:49, Marco Martin wrote: > > My vote would go for Plasma. > > +1, just "Plasma" without "KDE". > > On 21 August 2013 21:38, Martin Graesslin wrote: > > another idea: let's drop the version number completely and only use it > > internally (bugtracker, libs, etc.) > > I was thinking this too. But when a new version comes out how could we > promote it? Quoting our release announcement for 4.11: "KDE is delighted to announce its latest set of releases, providing major updates to KDE Plasma Workspaces, KDE Applications, and the KDE Platform." > Also if a product doesn't have a version then this could mean that it is > rolling. > Yes not always but this is the first thought that goes through the mind. No? And a rolling release might have version numbers. I'm using a rolling distro and it has version numbers, but I never know which one it is. So that argument works in both direction. I think there is no real sign that rolling releases do not have a version number. Cheers Martin signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
Hello, On 21 August 2013 12:49, Marco Martin wrote: > > My vote would go for Plasma. > +1, just "Plasma" without "KDE". On 21 August 2013 21:38, Martin Graesslin wrote: > > another idea: let's drop the version number completely and only use it > internally (bugtracker, libs, etc.) > I was thinking this too. But when a new version comes out how could we promote it? Also if a product doesn't have a version then this could mean that it is rolling. Yes not always but this is the first thought that goes through the mind. No? -- Giorgos Tsiapaliokas (terietor) terietor.org ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
2013/8/21 Martin Graesslin : > On Wednesday 21 August 2013 19:36:21 Daniel Nicoletti wrote: >> [...] >> Ok, then what am I doing wrong in calling my stuff KDE stuff? >> http://manifesto.kde.org/benefits.html lists what I do on my >> projects, I was arguing about Martin saying that I talk KDE as software >> but KDE projects are mostly software no? This is too controversial, >> I know the idea is the we KDE are a community, but it's a community >> that have projects and software hence why am wrong in saying >> KDE software? It's software made by KDE people. > Look for example at your rant about switches. It's always saying "KDE 4.11", > which is just wrong. That's what I meant. Just by scrolling down your blog I > see two posts with "KDE 4.11" in the title. This is working against the > rebranding. How are we supposed to have the media get it right, if even the > developers continue to use the old wording. It is simply convenient to use "KDE" meaning the Frameworks, Plasma-Workspaces etc. Saying "KDE" is much easier than distinguishing between the different parts, and it has been used like this for years. But I assume that this will change with the availability of KF 5 etc. As soon as the stuff is released at different times and in different packages, people will adapt to it and use the "right" names. (e.g. "New features in Plasma" or "API will be available in KDE-Frameworks 5.4", etc.) IMHO saying that "my software is part of KDE" is still correct, since KDE can mean the community as well in this context, in the same way Firefox is part of (the) Mozilla. (Project). Cheers, Matthias ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Wednesday 21 August 2013 19:36:21 Daniel Nicoletti wrote: > 2013/8/21 Sebastian Kügler : > > On Wednesday, August 21, 2013 17:12:10 Daniel Nicoletti wrote: > >> 2013/8/21 Martin Graesslin : > >> > Yes I noticed that for example you still talk about KDE as software in > >> > your > >> > blog posts. To be honest I have to cringe if I read it, because it > >> > makes > >> > the task of everyone more difficult who tries to work on the > >> > repositioning of the brand. > >> > >> Well if I write an app using Qt people call it a Qt app, when you use KDE > >> FW it becomes a KDE app. So what should I call the software I write when > >> using KDE FW? > > > > Just to chime in here, this is clearly wrong. A KDE App (or project, if > > you > > will) is not defined by its technical dependencies, but by the people who > > write it, see manifesto.kde.org. > > Ok, then what am I doing wrong in calling my stuff KDE stuff? > http://manifesto.kde.org/benefits.html lists what I do on my > projects, I was arguing about Martin saying that I talk KDE as software > but KDE projects are mostly software no? This is too controversial, > I know the idea is the we KDE are a community, but it's a community > that have projects and software hence why am wrong in saying > KDE software? It's software made by KDE people. Look for example at your rant about switches. It's always saying "KDE 4.11", which is just wrong. That's what I meant. Just by scrolling down your blog I see two posts with "KDE 4.11" in the title. This is working against the rebranding. How are we supposed to have the media get it right, if even the developers continue to use the old wording. Cheers Martin signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
Hi Plasma folks, This thread has been fascinating reading. I hope that after you reach a tentative conclusion, that you make a proposal to a list with a wider KDE audience, such as the KDE-Community list. KDE-devel, KDE-core-devel and KDE-Promo are some of the other possibilities to at least ping about a such an important conversation happening. It's really true that names matter, and thus that branding matters. Thanks so much for starting the discussion. Valorie On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 12:56 PM, Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > Hi... > > after seeing the Nth time that we don’t know if the next release will be > called Plasma Workspaces 2 or something else, i’d like to find consensus on > this point so we can move forward in communication with confidence. > > the first point that we’ve all been around a million times, but i will > cover > again for completeness: > > Do we need a single name for all the bits that go into our desktop > shell? > > yes, we do. > :: giant snip:: > ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
2013/8/21 Sebastian Kügler : > On Wednesday, August 21, 2013 17:12:10 Daniel Nicoletti wrote: >> 2013/8/21 Martin Graesslin : >> > Yes I noticed that for example you still talk about KDE as software in >> > your >> > blog posts. To be honest I have to cringe if I read it, because it makes >> > the task of everyone more difficult who tries to work on the >> > repositioning of the brand. >> >> Well if I write an app using Qt people call it a Qt app, when you use KDE FW >> it becomes a KDE app. So what should I call the software I write when using >> KDE FW? > > Just to chime in here, this is clearly wrong. A KDE App (or project, if you > will) is not defined by its technical dependencies, but by the people who > write it, see manifesto.kde.org. Ok, then what am I doing wrong in calling my stuff KDE stuff? http://manifesto.kde.org/benefits.html lists what I do on my projects, I was arguing about Martin saying that I talk KDE as software but KDE projects are mostly software no? This is too controversial, I know the idea is the we KDE are a community, but it's a community that have projects and software hence why am wrong in saying KDE software? It's software made by KDE people. > Daniel, I think you've gone a few years back in time, stuck your fingers > firmly into your ears as to the reasoning of the whole rebranding, and are now > trying to turn back the clocks for no good reason. I never intended to question the rebranding thing, I really don't care about it, KDE has always been a community just like Gnome and Linux are, making sure KDE isn't more just a desktop isn't the point I'm making. What I'm saying is that people still install distros choosing the "KDE desktop", and not the Plasma desktop, and this is one of the reasons why I believe Plasma 2, is the right name, this way people can know what plasma shell is and use this. In short don't you think the whole new 5 cycle needs more coordinating between all parts, will it be an SC, will there be an official shell of course if this is really going to happen? As you said the rebranding happened years ago but somehow I'm only seeing it affect software (as in releases) now. > Would you mind giving the rebranding another try to actually understand it, > and not work against what has been years of work, and not an easy, but very > much necessary endeavour? Then we could actually move forward, instead of one > step ahead, two steps back. Just forget I mentioned KDE and SC, just take my +1 on Plasma 2, this is becoming an endless and unnecessary discussion, already regret for giving my 2c please give them back :P ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Wednesday 21 August 2013 14:39:36 Rick Stockton wrote: > > BTW, as a (mostly) end-User, I'm fine (and prefer) Plasma-2. But KDE > without "base" SC Releases will tend to fragment Distro content > selection, right? sorry, I have to be a bit tedious here :p isn't this material for a completely different discussion? a bit OT.. how to call the desktop doesn't really affect the release cycle Cheers, Marco Martin ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
I wonder: If KDE will not define and Release an internally consistent 'SC' anymore, then how should packagers differentiate between "Minor Version" and "Point Release Updates" for their end users? I understand the use of an RPM or Deb name such as "Task-KDE-Plasma" used as a collection, defining multiple packages as a combined unit -- but if we off-load the definition of such packages to the Distros, I'm afraid that we might see a huge increase in Distro-specific Bugs - and they'd be bugs which we can't reproduce, because we've (possibly) made the definition of KDE contents too flexible, and don't have all of those configurations available to run ourselves. IMO, it would be a Very-Bad-Thing(tm) if our first response to many bugs becomes a request to "clean up their package selection, and see if the probelm is still reproducible". A number of such requests to "elinimate weirdness", from bug triage persons, would basically be like the definition of an SC anyway. (But after the fact, and all of the misdirected packaging work, and aggravation of end Users). If we consider it a Good-Thing(tm) to avoid defining co-requisite KDE libraries at Release Time, does our own Release process (and that of all our "K" Softwares) have the time and facilities to test a large number of possible combinations? Or, is my worry resolved by already-in-progress refactoring? BTW, as a (mostly) end-User, I'm fine (and prefer) Plasma-2. But KDE without "base" SC Releases will tend to fragment Distro content selection, right? On 08/21/2013 12:35 PM, Martin Graesslin wrote: <> On Wednesday 21 August 2013 15:58:03 Daniel Nicoletti wrote: 2013/8/21 Martin Graesslin : On Wednesday 21 August 2013 13:52:06 Daniel Nicoletti wrote: 2013/8/21 Martin Graesslin : On Wednesday 21 August 2013 11:29:52 Daniel Nicoletti wrote: this might change. Consider Razor/LXDE joining the KDE umbrella. What then? From one day to another it would be obvious that using "the KDE desktop" is not working any more. << big snip of stuff not relevant to my questions >> Who said there will be a software compilation in the KF 5 world or that the Plasma Workspaces will be part of such a maybe existing software compilation? Please note that this has not yet been discussed, but I know that a few people in the Plasma team (me included) would favor to not have the SC anymore. The reasons you mention are a part of it. In fact the whole discussion highlights it. We would not need to think about a version number if Plasma would be part of the software compilation. Cheers Martin -- GPG fingerprint: 597E 4CE5 6D56 A7C2 DA3A 26FF F21F F828 0C86 165A ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Wednesday, August 21, 2013 17:12:10 Daniel Nicoletti wrote: > 2013/8/21 Martin Graesslin : > > Yes I noticed that for example you still talk about KDE as software in > > your > > blog posts. To be honest I have to cringe if I read it, because it makes > > the task of everyone more difficult who tries to work on the > > repositioning of the brand. > > Well if I write an app using Qt people call it a Qt app, when you use KDE FW > it becomes a KDE app. So what should I call the software I write when using > KDE FW? Just to chime in here, this is clearly wrong. A KDE App (or project, if you will) is not defined by its technical dependencies, but by the people who write it, see manifesto.kde.org. Daniel, I think you've gone a few years back in time, stuck your fingers firmly into your ears as to the reasoning of the whole rebranding, and are now trying to turn back the clocks for no good reason. Would you mind giving the rebranding another try to actually understand it, and not work against what has been years of work, and not an easy, but very much necessary endeavour? Then we could actually move forward, instead of one step ahead, two steps back. Thanks, -- sebas http://www.kde.org | http://vizZzion.org | GPG Key ID: 9119 0EF9 ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
2013/8/21 Martin Graesslin : > Yes I noticed that for example you still talk about KDE as software in your > blog posts. To be honest I have to cringe if I read it, because it makes the > task of everyone more difficult who tries to work on the repositioning of the > brand. Well if I write an app using Qt people call it a Qt app, when you use KDE FW it becomes a KDE app. So what should I call the software I write when using KDE FW? > It is important. If people from the outside think it's one coherent thing we > wouldn't need efforts like frameworks to make it more attractive for 3rd party > developers and it also makes any attempts to get KWin as the window manager > for all Qt based shells much more difficult. Which is a reason why I do care > about it. Well re-branding is really hard, it's for a reason companies fight for names... Clearly I'm not alone in not know how to properly brand things now. >> The KDE community has to decide which will be the included, since plasma >> got there first there isn't much chance for a replacement, then better >> do like Razor. > does the KDE community have to decide? Yes, look at the old Oyranos vs colord-kde thread, in the end colord-kde probably has more usage where KWin color correction only works with Oyranos (I don't plan to fix this before we have wayland). And Kolor-manager ended up in extragear... > Did the community ever decide that > there can only be one file manager in the SC? The fact that Konqueror is also a file manager could be tagged as historical reason imho. > Also does software have to be in > the SC? Or is software more blessed by being in the SC? Sure it is, most distros have meta packages which installing kde-utils brings a bunch of "utils" stuff, if your app is in there it gets more attention. > Large part of the > release announcement for 4.11 is about KScreen - to my knowledge it's not even > released as part of the SC. Right, it got good promoting due to being an important thing to many users, would a new clock applet (not part of the SC) get on the announcement page? > What do you think is the more prominent music > player by KDE? Amarok which is not part of the SC or juk which is part of the > SC? Same for IM - kopete vs kpt. I do agree with you it's not needed to be in the SC, but notice the core apps vs regular apps difference, if I write another window manager that happens to replace kwin in the SC would people still want to install KWin? Sure if you promote it better (or have more quality) downstream might use it as default. > Who said there will be a software compilation in the KF 5 world or that the > Plasma Workspaces will be part of such a maybe existing software compilation? Nobody (afaik) said the opposite either :) > Please note that this has not yet been discussed, but I know that a few people > in the Plasma team (me included) would favor to not have the SC anymore. The > reasons you mention are a part of it. In fact the whole discussion highlights > it. OK, then imho we could have modules SC ie kde utils/edu... SC, the SC is good because it help with the coordination of small modules that doesn't have to worry when to release their stuff. > We would not need to think about a version number if Plasma would be part > of the software compilation. Well if that's the reason shouldn't the discussion about having/being part of SC take place first? ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Wednesday 21 August 2013 15:58:03 Daniel Nicoletti wrote: > 2013/8/21 Martin Graesslin : > > On Wednesday 21 August 2013 13:52:06 Daniel Nicoletti wrote: > >> 2013/8/21 Martin Graesslin : > >> > On Wednesday 21 August 2013 11:29:52 Daniel Nicoletti wrote: > >> > this might change. Consider Razor/LXDE joining the KDE umbrella. What > >> > then? > >> > From one day to another it would be obvious that using "the KDE > >> > desktop" > >> > is > >> > not working any more. > >> > >> In that case what we will end up is with just KDE libraries? I mean > >> people are used to "install/use KDE" which means the SC. > > > > no?!? I fail to see what you want to tell us, I cannot follow your > > thought. I guess it's based on you still think that KDE is not the > > community but all the software we tend to release once half a year. > > Sorry if it's hard to understand, so I'll try to put it into another way: > * First I just wanted to say that I prefer Plasma 2 instead of 5, because it > helps understanding the age and we have lots of other KDE components with > different versions than 5. > > * Second I'm saying that KDE is also the software because we do release a >KDE Software Compilation which has the KDE name. ok, that I did not get at all :-) I personally also don't like 5 for the .0 reason. > > * I know we don't market the KDE desktop anymore, all the blog posts >around KDE still talk about it as a DE. Lots of friends that use KDE SC >don't even know what is plasma-desktop because for them it's KDE. Yes I noticed that for example you still talk about KDE as software in your blog posts. To be honest I have to cringe if I read it, because it makes the task of everyone more difficult who tries to work on the repositioning of the brand. It is important. If people from the outside think it's one coherent thing we wouldn't need efforts like frameworks to make it more attractive for 3rd party developers and it also makes any attempts to get KWin as the window manager for all Qt based shells much more difficult. Which is a reason why I do care about it. > > For example what happens if I want my own shell (no I didn't write one :P ) > on the KDE SC? > > The KDE community has to decide which will be the included, since plasma > got there first there isn't much chance for a replacement, then better > do like Razor. does the KDE community have to decide? Did the community ever decide that there can only be one file manager in the SC? Also does software have to be in the SC? Or is software more blessed by being in the SC? Large part of the release announcement for 4.11 is about KScreen - to my knowledge it's not even released as part of the SC. What do you think is the more prominent music player by KDE? Amarok which is not part of the SC or juk which is part of the SC? Same for IM - kopete vs kpt. > > I'm not against the KDE renaming, but I think we are getting > to a point that having an Software Compilation becomes a > problem. If Razor is now a KDE project they why only plasma > is included? Who said there will be a software compilation in the KF 5 world or that the Plasma Workspaces will be part of such a maybe existing software compilation? Please note that this has not yet been discussed, but I know that a few people in the Plasma team (me included) would favor to not have the SC anymore. The reasons you mention are a part of it. In fact the whole discussion highlights it. We would not need to think about a version number if Plasma would be part of the software compilation. Cheers Martin signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
2013/8/21 Martin Graesslin : > On Wednesday 21 August 2013 13:52:06 Daniel Nicoletti wrote: >> 2013/8/21 Martin Graesslin : >> > On Wednesday 21 August 2013 11:29:52 Daniel Nicoletti wrote: >> > this might change. Consider Razor/LXDE joining the KDE umbrella. What >> > then? >> > From one day to another it would be obvious that using "the KDE desktop" >> > is >> > not working any more. >> >> In that case what we will end up is with just KDE libraries? I mean >> people are used to "install/use KDE" which means the SC. > no?!? I fail to see what you want to tell us, I cannot follow your thought. I > guess it's based on you still think that KDE is not the community but all the > software we tend to release once half a year. Sorry if it's hard to understand, so I'll try to put it into another way: * First I just wanted to say that I prefer Plasma 2 instead of 5, because it helps understanding the age and we have lots of other KDE components with different versions than 5. * Second I'm saying that KDE is also the software because we do release a KDE Software Compilation which has the KDE name. * I know we don't market the KDE desktop anymore, all the blog posts around KDE still talk about it as a DE. Lots of friends that use KDE SC don't even know what is plasma-desktop because for them it's KDE. For example what happens if I want my own shell (no I didn't write one :P ) on the KDE SC? The KDE community has to decide which will be the included, since plasma got there first there isn't much chance for a replacement, then better do like Razor. I'm not against the KDE renaming, but I think we are getting to a point that having an Software Compilation becomes a problem. If Razor is now a KDE project they why only plasma is included? About print-manager the user can see it's version using the about module of system-settings, but since KDE does the branching/tagging it's easier to just rely on the KDE version, the 0.3 vesion is something useless when on SC. But to me as a developer tells me how much I change it, and since it's mostly complete 4.10 has 0.3 and 4.11 has 0.3 because most commits where just bugfixes. Also dpkg -l print-manager shows the KDE SC version (so it does for dolphin). PS I don't care much what plasma does as I'm mostly a user of plasma shell and API, but as a user I just felt that jumping into 5 just because the KDE FW is at 5 seems wrong, as after all KDE is just the community. ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Monday 19 August 2013 21:56:35 Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > Other proposals, ideas, tweaks to the above most welcome, but let’s try to > come to a consensus on this matter before the end of this month. another idea: let's drop the version number completely and only use it internally (bugtracker, libs, etc.). Got that idea while reading a news that Cryengine 3 got renamed to Cryengine Cheers Martin signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Wednesday 21 August 2013 13:52:06 Daniel Nicoletti wrote: > 2013/8/21 Martin Graesslin : > > On Wednesday 21 August 2013 11:29:52 Daniel Nicoletti wrote: > >> My 2c, > >> > >> On KDE 4 aka KDE SC 4, plasma was always just plasma, > >> no user says I'm using the plasma shell (as there isn't another > >> KDE option). > > > > this might change. Consider Razor/LXDE joining the KDE umbrella. What > > then? > > From one day to another it would be obvious that using "the KDE desktop" > > is > > not working any more. > > In that case what we will end up is with just KDE libraries? I mean > people are used to "install/use KDE" which means the SC. no?!? I fail to see what you want to tell us, I cannot follow your thought. I guess it's based on you still think that KDE is not the community but all the software we tend to release once half a year. > > If we are going to drop the "KDE desktop" then imho it should > be better to put some marketing on the "Plasma desktop" > which uses KDE technology. We haven't marketed a "KDE desktop" for years now. > > The same imho happens to Razor/LXDE, they will keep being > Razor/LXDE maybe using KDE pieces. At some point KDE > might vanish completely as the more things from the > frameworks are upstreamed (not that this is bad!). Why should KDE vanish if Razor uses frameworks? I fail to follow your reasoning. > > This of course end up being completely ok with the new > KDE = comunity branding which to me is a shame that > the shell looses it's identity. I somehow imagine in the > future people talking about plasma people or lxde people > and the KDE name being left only for frameworks. Why should they only talk about Plasma? > > Of course I'm just supposing. > > > I'm in fact aware of at least three desktop shells by the KDE community. > > The only thing those three share is the window manager. > > But at some level "the" KDE shell is plasma, and if these others want > to be known > the have to do the promoting themselves. Just for the record: one of the three desktop shells I meant is Plasma :-) As far as I know the other shells don't want to be promoted, but they would get obviously the same level of promotion. The dot is open to every KDE project. > > > Given that we know that we want to open us for more projects and that we > > want to get our technologies into other Qt based desktops, it would be a > > really bad idea to ignore this fact when we do the planning for the next > > version. > No, I'm not saying to ignore this fact. It's just that imho > the idea of pushing Plasma to version 5 is bad for the > reasons I mentioned. If plasma will keep being included > into KDE SC the SC version is what users see. I really have problems understanding your arguments. They seem to be centered around "I don't like the renaming of KDE, thus I do not like this". I think the renaming was a good step and reflects much better what we as a community do. I can only recommend to open up on it and see the positive aspects of it. > > An example is that when someone fill a bug against > say print-manager I care which KDE version they have > and not if p-m is at version 0.3, because I know which > version was included in that SC. then you should fix this. In KWin we include also information about kdelibs version (compilation, runtime) and Qt. It helps a lot. Personal remark: I sometimes have problems following your arguments and recently I had the feeling that you jump to wrong conclusions based on incorrect and incomplete data. I think this is also here the case. You jump directly to the conclusion but seem to miss the reasons and the good advantages of the renaming of KDE. Just look at the manifesto - without the renaming that would not have happened. As you have not been at Akademy I recommend to watch the recordings of Kevin's keynote. Cheers Martin signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
2013/8/21 Martin Graesslin : > On Wednesday 21 August 2013 11:29:52 Daniel Nicoletti wrote: >> My 2c, >> >> On KDE 4 aka KDE SC 4, plasma was always just plasma, >> no user says I'm using the plasma shell (as there isn't another >> KDE option). > this might change. Consider Razor/LXDE joining the KDE umbrella. What then? > From one day to another it would be obvious that using "the KDE desktop" is > not working any more. In that case what we will end up is with just KDE libraries? I mean people are used to "install/use KDE" which means the SC. If we are going to drop the "KDE desktop" then imho it should be better to put some marketing on the "Plasma desktop" which uses KDE technology. The same imho happens to Razor/LXDE, they will keep being Razor/LXDE maybe using KDE pieces. At some point KDE might vanish completely as the more things from the frameworks are upstreamed (not that this is bad!). This of course end up being completely ok with the new KDE = comunity branding which to me is a shame that the shell looses it's identity. I somehow imagine in the future people talking about plasma people or lxde people and the KDE name being left only for frameworks. Of course I'm just supposing. > I'm in fact aware of at least three desktop shells by the KDE community. The > only thing those three share is the window manager. But at some level "the" KDE shell is plasma, and if these others want to be known the have to do the promoting themselves. > Given that we know that we want to open us for more projects and that we want > to get our technologies into other Qt based desktops, it would be a really bad > idea to ignore this fact when we do the planning for the next version. No, I'm not saying to ignore this fact. It's just that imho the idea of pushing Plasma to version 5 is bad for the reasons I mentioned. If plasma will keep being included into KDE SC the SC version is what users see. An example is that when someone fill a bug against say print-manager I care which KDE version they have and not if p-m is at version 0.3, because I know which version was included in that SC. Best ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Wednesday 21 August 2013 11:29:52 Daniel Nicoletti wrote: > My 2c, > > On KDE 4 aka KDE SC 4, plasma was always just plasma, > no user says I'm using the plasma shell (as there isn't another > KDE option). this might change. Consider Razor/LXDE joining the KDE umbrella. What then? >From one day to another it would be obvious that using "the KDE desktop" is not working any more. I'm in fact aware of at least three desktop shells by the KDE community. The only thing those three share is the window manager. Given that we know that we want to open us for more projects and that we want to get our technologies into other Qt based desktops, it would be a really bad idea to ignore this fact when we do the planning for the next version. > some components happen to have survived since > KDE 1 (kwin/konqueror maybe?), Just for the record: both KWin and Konqueror got introduced in KDE (SC) 2. The oldest to my knowledge still being developed application is KMail. Cheers Martin signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
2013/8/21 Marco Martin : > On Wednesday 21 August 2013, Daniel Nicoletti wrote: >> My 2c, >> >> On KDE 4 aka KDE SC 4, plasma was always just plasma, >> no user says I'm using the plasma shell (as there isn't another >> KDE option). > > Incidently, the whole SC stuff, was never intended for marketing and public > communication, but it ended up that way, and sure enough press reaction to SC > was overwhelmingly negative. Sure, just to clarify what I was trying to state is that most users know the KDE version not the components of it. For the SC maybe in 5 we could go back to "we are KDE and KDE is also the software" I think people can tell the difference without an "SC" :P but whatever that's another (endless) discussion and off topic... ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Wednesday 21 August 2013, Daniel Nicoletti wrote: > My 2c, > > On KDE 4 aka KDE SC 4, plasma was always just plasma, > no user says I'm using the plasma shell (as there isn't another > KDE option). Incidently, the whole SC stuff, was never intended for marketing and public communication, but it ended up that way, and sure enough press reaction to SC was overwhelmingly negative. -- Marco Martin ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
My 2c, On KDE 4 aka KDE SC 4, plasma was always just plasma, no user says I'm using the plasma shell (as there isn't another KDE option). I think even if Plasma is numbered after 2, users will still say they have installed KDE 5 or KDE SC 5, the marketing imo must go to the whole SC 5 and not to single components, for example I go to dolphin look at it's version and I have 2.2 but my KDE is 4.10.5, when the user report bugs most of the time they specify the whole KDE version and not the component one. Having KDE as just as people (bad thing imho) brings these issues, do we install KDE software? Or would I install KDE people? IMHO the core of the KDE is it's libraries/frameworks which will be named at 5. One can write another KDE shell (iirc there is kor) (and don't make it in SC) but that will still be a KDE shell. enough talking to summarize I'd say we should go for KDE SC 5 which includes 2nd gen of Plasma, 3rd gen of dolphin and so on, some components happen to have survived since KDE 1 (kwin/konqueror maybe?), naming Plasma as 5 doesn't reflect it's real age. Regards, -- Daniel Nicoletti - http://dantti.wordpress.com ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Monday 19 August 2013, Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > > Other proposals, ideas, tweaks to the above most welcome, but let’s try to > come to a consensus on this matter before the end of this month. > > then we can all move forward in confidence together, whatever it is we > decide. after thinking about it for a while, just few considerations * we want to maintain the "kde is the community, not the software" mantra * so a name for "the product workspace" is needed * any descriptive name, sich as "workspace" "shell" "desktop" risks to be too narrow, nerdy and cold * a name that sounds cool but doesn't really describe something is better, "plasma" or "plasma active" are (as the term "firefox" per se doesn't have anything to do with browser) * Plasma has quite some luggage already, that may be an advantage or a disadvantage, i don't know (but we have years of climbing the googlability of the term already, that's quite an investment) * Plasma Active may indeed cause a problem in perception and bogus articles like "kde is dropping the desktop for tablets". Paradoxically I think the place where instead would have a good effect is the internal developer community (for applications developers there is still a bit of "the active version is not my problem, i care only about desktop" feeling * I'm not sure thinking about a completely different new name would come up with something that would work, but if someone can think about any, please speak ;) My vote would go for Plasma. hell, i would even go as far as changing the kickoff icon (no, not with the cashew, with something better :p) About numbers, 2 or 5 i don't know, they may risk to dilute the catchiness? Cheers, Marco Martin ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Monday, August 19, 2013 21:56:35 Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > given that we are moving to a “grand unified shell” approach where the > different user experiences flow seamlessly from one to the next, it may > make sense to drop the concept that there is such huge differentiation that > they are the “Workspaces” and instead are just “Plasma” which happens to > morph to fit the device. Brainfart ahead. We come up with a plan for a headless module for Plasma, that basically sets up a local server, installs kolab, owncloud, jabber, your own image sharing service, etc. and whatever else is needed to take the cloud private, and offer that as an option you can install on a random device, connect storage. (Could even be a mediacenter that is running both, plasma-mediacenter and the server packages. Such a relatively constrained target device could be made to work really well with the device, and provide the basic needs for circumventing a lot of privacy problems around centralized web services, targeting the increased needs for really private communication. On the client side is entirely integrated in the UI through predefined setups for Kontact, KPeople and KTelepathy, a file sync client. Configuration and other metadata could possibly be synced across devices safely that way as well, and possibly even be rolled out to clients in more enterprise setups, or serve as a remote control channel for different devices (media playback, etc.). -- sebas http://www.kde.org | http://vizZzion.org | GPG Key ID: 9119 0EF9 ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Monday, August 19, 2013 21:56:35 Aaron J. Seigo wrote: [ snipperdeesnip ] > “KDE’s Plasma workspaces come in Desktop, Netbook, Tablet and > Mediacenter > flavours...” > > “KDE’s Plasma provides user experiences for desktop, netbook, tablet, > ..” > > given that we are moving to a “grand unified shell” approach where the > different user experiences flow seamlessly from one to the next, it may > make sense to drop the concept that there is such huge differentiation that > they are the “Workspaces” and instead are just “Plasma” which happens to > morph to fit the device. Anecdotal supporting evidence: When we first interacted with the wider Mer and device community around Plasma Active, in casual communication, I often heard people calling "the UI" simply Plasma. That's an interesting target group, as it fits nicely into those that we probably want to sell our seamless experience to, and rather unbiased. I think more or less radically drop the notion of devices (or rather, leaving that to the packagers, in terms of installation) makes the most sense, as we can nicely work two ways, from "Plasma, the Desktop Brand" and "Plasma" the device UI (and even Plasma Mediacenter) towards that morphing UI. Kind of the NetBSD of the modern age: "It even runs on a toaster". > 3. ‘2’ ... why “two” if this is version 5? well, libplasma is actually going > to be version 6 iirc, so it isn’t the library. i also am not a big believer > in branding after version numbers. neither are any of our proprietary > competitors who have a lot more marketing and communications savvy than we > tend to. ;) what i like about 2 is: > > * it communicates this is something after the first. it’s that whole “two > point oh” thing, though hopefully less hype than, say, “web 2.0” ;) > > * it’s simple and direct > > * ‘2’ is a couple, and a couple is a nice human idea :) this is borne out by > the “1, 2, many” pattern in many ancient languages. we know 1, we know 2, > after that it’s just an abstract concept. One option that crossed my mind was "Plasma 5". I agree with your findings regarding Plasma vs. Plasma Workspaces, etc., and my gut feeling tends to just Plasma. in that regard. As to the version, 5 gives some sense to continuation of what was earlier the KDE 4 series, and I think there is some attachment to this, as it also communicates a continuation of our experience and evolution in creating workspaces. The .so versioning should, indeed, be just an implementation detail, and as such in line with other frameworks. Incidentally, both, .so version and "communication version" would be the same though (but explicitely do not *have* to, we can care about that later, though). So Plasma 5 would be the continuation of KDE Plasma Workspaces 4.x, and, accidentally also Plasma Active Four. > Sooo ... here is my proposal: > > We call it Plasma 2 and use that as a rallying call to > focus on its unified user experience > across the spectrum of devices people use today. > > as developers, it will remind us of our goals. > > to our users, it will be the symbol of this idea of all these individual > components that work together beautifully no matter what device you put it > on. > > yes, this means we drop “Workspaces” as clumsy, hard to understand and no > longer fully applicable. > > > Other proposals, ideas, tweaks to the above most welcome, but let’s try to > come to a consensus on this matter before the end of this month. > > then we can all move forward in confidence together, whatever it is we > decide. Otherwise, this strategy sounds fine to me. Thoughts on the 5? -- sebas http://www.kde.org | http://vizZzion.org | GPG Key ID: 9119 0EF9 ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Tuesday, August 20, 2013 10:56:41 Marco Martin wrote: > On Tuesday 20 August 2013, Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > > > > That’s also what I see in the openSuse packages. > > > > So, yes, I got the # wrong .. it’s 3, not 5 currently .. so we’d end up > > with 4 unless we skip it go to 5. Still, the “number used in the name > > doesn’t match the version number of ” comment > > remains > > uuh, right, build from master does a so.3.. > hmm, wonder where the 4 is gone, if was ever "decided" or just done by > mistake... > so do we go for .4 (until we have time?) Uhm, no, as ervin suggested, the so version should be 5, in line with other frameworks. > > Basically, I’m suggesting that naming the product after the version of the > > software isn’t a necessity and may not even be possible unless we elevate > > one specific component to be the “defining” component, which I don’t think > > we ought to do. > > yes, more and more evident that things like library versions are to be seen > as a small implementation detail and indeed not affect our communication. :) -- sebas http://www.kde.org | http://vizZzion.org | GPG Key ID: 9119 0EF9 ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Tuesday 20 August 2013, Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > > That’s also what I see in the openSuse packages. > > So, yes, I got the # wrong .. it’s 3, not 5 currently .. so we’d end up > with 4 unless we skip it go to 5. Still, the “number used in the name > doesn’t match the version number of ” comment > remains uuh, right, build from master does a so.3.. hmm, wonder where the 4 is gone, if was ever "decided" or just done by mistake... so do we go for .4 (until we have time?) > Basically, I’m suggesting that naming the product after the version of the > software isn’t a necessity and may not even be possible unless we elevate > one specific component to be the “defining” component, which I don’t think > we ought to do. yes, more and more evident that things like library versions are to be seen as a small implementation detail ;) -- Marco Martin ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Tuesday 20 August 2013 09:56:59 Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > one tempting idea is to promote “Plasma Active” up as the name used for all > the workspaces ... I would vote against "Plasma Active" as that might end up at the users (and media and they can get it wrong big times) as we drop the desktop system in favor of the tablet thingy. For many users Active is just the tablet shell. I fear that this could end up being seen in exactly the opposite way as we want to achieve with the one device shell approach. If you want to get it wrong, you'll get it wrong and lately I have the feeling that the media is getting it wrong on purpose just to have more clicks. > > the most minimalist thing would be to just call it all “Plasma” and be done > with it and not try at all to differentiate the new release from the old by > the product name. > > another approach would be to shift weight to “Active” and drop “Plasma” from > the name, though “KDE Active” is not as google-able and we lose whatever > value we’ve put into Plasma as a brand. I agree that we should somehow keep Plasma in it. > > *sigh* this needs more thought :/ > > > I do want to promote KWin for the usage in LXDE/Razor as in the next > > version we will hardly have any build-time dependencies from frameworks > > higher than tier1. I'm concerned that a generic name "Plasma" would work > > against that as it would be difficult to communicate that although being > > part of Plasma not being part of Plasma. > > i suppose it comes down to the following two things: > > * do we feel we can communicate clearly, developer to developer, what Plasma > is, and how components like KWin fit within that > * do we expect LXDE / Razor developers to be intelligent people who will > understand technical communication > > my experience with both of those things is “yes” I'm also not concerned with devs. I'm quite sure that this will be not of an issue. I'm more concerned about the users as they will have to choose OpenBox or KWin. If they think that with KWin they get the full "bloat" of Plasma on a lightweight desktop they will not use it out of principle. We already see that LXDE has to fight against the bloat perspective since they started using Qt - which is a pity. Cheers Martin signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Tuesday, August 20, 2013 07:06:10 Martin Graesslin wrote: > On Monday 19 August 2013 21:56:35 Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > > 3. â2â ... why âtwoâ if this is version 5? well, libplasma is actually > > going to be version 6 iirc, so it isnât the library. i also am not a big > > believer in branding after version numbers. neither are any of our > > proprietary competitors who have a lot more marketing and communications > > savvy than we tend to. ;) what i like about 2 is: > > > > * it communicates this is something after the first. itâs that whole âtwo > > point ohâ thing, though hopefully less hype than, say, âweb 2.0â ;) > > > > * itâs simple and direct > > > > * â2â is a couple, and a couple is a nice human idea :) this is borne out > > by the â1, 2, manyâ pattern in many ancient languages. we know 1, we know > > 2, after that itâs just an abstract concept. > > I would like to get rid of version numbers in the traditional way. If the > numbers are small, it's fine. But looking at many projects I am not able to > get how old software is based on the number. > > So instead I suggest that we go by year and numbering: > * 2014.1.4 > * 2014.2.2 > * 2014.3.1 > -> year.major.minor > > It would also prevent the confusion that several parts of our software has > now different versions and especially that 4+1=2 :-) for versioning, i agree. “Plasma 2” (or whatever) will be a product name, not a version (in the technical sense of that word). thinking about this overnight, i did run into some possible annoyances. we’ve been sort of taking this approach with Plasma Active. so now we have Plasma Active 4. i’m unsure how that would work (poorly, i think) with “Plasma 2” as the product name. another approach is to not use a number at all and give it a proper name as we did with Plasma Active (which, iirc, was Sebas’ brainchild of a name?). which would make the next major version “Plasma ” and this would replace Plasma Desktop, Netbook, Active (and perhaps Mediacenter?) as product names. they would of course remain buried in the technical details of our code to some extent (e.g. there may always be a plasma-mediacenter binary, though it would be cool if that went away too ..). this would reflect even more clearly than my first proposal that we are harmonizing all the shells into one Thing(tm). one tempting idea is to promote “Plasma Active” up as the name used for all the workspaces ... the most minimalist thing would be to just call it all “Plasma” and be done with it and not try at all to differentiate the new release from the old by the product name. another approach would be to shift weight to “Active” and drop “Plasma” from the name, though “KDE Active” is not as google-able and we lose whatever value we’ve put into Plasma as a brand. *sigh* this needs more thought :/ > I do want to promote KWin for the usage in LXDE/Razor as in the next version > we will hardly have any build-time dependencies from frameworks higher than > tier1. I'm concerned that a generic name "Plasma" would work against that > as it would be difficult to communicate that although being part of Plasma > not being part of Plasma. i suppose it comes down to the following two things: * do we feel we can communicate clearly, developer to developer, what Plasma is, and how components like KWin fit within that * do we expect LXDE / Razor developers to be intelligent people who will understand technical communication my experience with both of those things is “yes” the idea with having a name for this thing we’re making is to give the final product a name. consider that if we adopt SDDM as part of that “complete product” that SDDM will be part of Plasma (the product), even though SDDM will obviously remain an independent project. this is equally true with all components that are part of the Plasma product. each component is its own living, breathing thing .. and we pull those components together to create an integrated, finished product called Plasma. it’s the same as a screw that is used to hold together a dining room chair. it can also be used to hang a picture on a wall. even though it is part of the “chair” product, it can be used for other purposes as well. that is what we need to communicate clearly to projects such as LXDE / Razor. it’s also mindset i’m hoping people working on various components that make up Plasma will adopt as it accurately captures how we work together collaboratively yet with independence. > We should also think about what the name would mean for bug reporting. We > don't want that all bugs for everything what is in kde-workspaces nowadays > ends up in the component plasma. we already get bug reports for kdelibs and Qt and all sorts of other things. this is, i’m afraid, unavoidable. -- Aaron J. Seigo signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Plasma-devel mail
Re: naming the next major release
On Monday 19 August 2013 21:56:35 Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > 3. ‘2’ ... why “two” if this is version 5? well, libplasma is actually going > to be version 6 iirc, so it isn’t the library. i also am not a big believer > in branding after version numbers. neither are any of our proprietary > competitors who have a lot more marketing and communications savvy than we > tend to. ;) what i like about 2 is: > > * it communicates this is something after the first. it’s that whole “two > point oh” thing, though hopefully less hype than, say, “web 2.0” ;) > > * it’s simple and direct > > * ‘2’ is a couple, and a couple is a nice human idea :) this is borne out by > the “1, 2, many” pattern in many ancient languages. we know 1, we know 2, > after that it’s just an abstract concept. I would like to get rid of version numbers in the traditional way. If the numbers are small, it's fine. But looking at many projects I am not able to get how old software is based on the number. So instead I suggest that we go by year and numbering: * 2014.1.4 * 2014.2.2 * 2014.3.1 -> year.major.minor It would also prevent the confusion that several parts of our software has now different versions and especially that 4+1=2 :-) > > > > Sooo ... here is my proposal: > > We call it Plasma 2 and use that as a rallying call to > focus on its unified user experience > across the spectrum of devices people use today. I do want to promote KWin for the usage in LXDE/Razor as in the next version we will hardly have any build-time dependencies from frameworks higher than tier1. I'm concerned that a generic name "Plasma" would work against that as it would be difficult to communicate that although being part of Plasma not being part of Plasma. If someone has a good idea on how to properly communicate this without being confusing (especially for users who want the lightweight aspect of LXDE and Plasma is for people in that user group unfortunately the definition of bloat) I consider this as a non-blocking issue for the naming. We should also think about what the name would mean for bug reporting. We don't want that all bugs for everything what is in kde-workspaces nowadays ends up in the component plasma. Cheers Martin P.S. Thanks for bringing the topic to the mailing list. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Monday, August 19, 2013 23:08:15 Marco Martin wrote: > On Monday 19 August 2013, Kevin Ottens wrote: > > On Monday 19 August 2013 21:56:35 Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > > > 3. ‘2’ ... why “two” if this is version 5? well, libplasma is actually > > > going to be version 6 iirc, so it isn’t the library. > > > > Not that its relevant for the rest of the discussion, but as the library > > number itself is concerned you can make it 5. And that's in fact my > > preference as I'd like all our library numbers to be in sync for a change. .. > yes, plasma2 has .so.5 atm, plasma1 is 4 Really? I’m getting this from master: -- Installing: /opt/kde4/lib/libplasma.so.3.0.0 That’s also what I see in the openSuse packages. So, yes, I got the # wrong .. it’s 3, not 5 currently .. so we’d end up with 4 unless we skip it go to 5. Still, the “number used in the name doesn’t match the version number of ” comment remains It’s also made more complex once we look at things like kscreen which seems to be at version 1.x; the more components we look at as part of the Plasma shell the more version variance there is. If we do end up using SDDM then it gets even more difficult as we don’t even control the versioning of all the software. Basically, I’m suggesting that naming the product after the version of the software isn’t a necessity and may not even be possible unless we elevate one specific component to be the “defining” component, which I don’t think we ought to do. -- Aaron J. Seigo signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Monday 19 August 2013 23:08:15 Marco Martin wrote: > On Monday 19 August 2013, Kevin Ottens wrote: > > On Monday 19 August 2013 21:56:35 Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > > > 3. ‘2’ ... why “two” if this is version 5? well, libplasma is actually > > > going to be version 6 iirc, so it isn’t the library. > > > > Not that its relevant for the rest of the discussion, but as the library > > number itself is concerned you can make it 5. And that's in fact my > > preference as I'd like all our library numbers to be in sync for a change. > > > > :-) > > > > Regards. > > yes, plasma2 has .so.5 atm, plasma1 is 4 Yep, only kdecore and kdeui were ahead because of a very old binary compatibility breakage during the KDE2 (IIRC) timeframe. But guess what? Those two are almost gone (I'll likely make the commits to clean them for good tomorrow). :-) Regards. -- 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. ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Monday 19 August 2013, Kevin Ottens wrote: > On Monday 19 August 2013 21:56:35 Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > > 3. ‘2’ ... why “two” if this is version 5? well, libplasma is actually > > going to be version 6 iirc, so it isn’t the library. > > Not that its relevant for the rest of the discussion, but as the library > number itself is concerned you can make it 5. And that's in fact my > preference as I'd like all our library numbers to be in sync for a change. > :-) > > Regards. yes, plasma2 has .so.5 atm, plasma1 is 4 -- Marco Martin ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
Re: naming the next major release
On Monday 19 August 2013 21:56:35 Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > 3. ‘2’ ... why “two” if this is version 5? well, libplasma is actually going > to be version 6 iirc, so it isn’t the library. Not that its relevant for the rest of the discussion, but as the library number itself is concerned you can make it 5. And that's in fact my preference as I'd like all our library numbers to be in sync for a change. :-) Regards. -- 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. ___ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
naming the next major release
Hi... after seeing the Nth time that we don’t know if the next release will be called Plasma Workspaces 2 or something else, i’d like to find consensus on this point so we can move forward in communication with confidence. the first point that we’ve all been around a million times, but i will cover again for completeness: Do we need a single name for all the bits that go into our desktop shell? yes, we do. a) the PR reason: it is impossible to communicate clearly about “those 20 things that fit together but which all have different (and kooky) names” and for that reason it is very hard for people to identify with or understand such a product. b) the developers reason: it allows us to draw a clear line around the workspaces (desktop, netbook, active, etc.) and everything else KDE produces. this is key for broader use of our libraries (Frameworks 5) and our applications: when people don’t understand they aren’t connected to the “desktop platform” they don’t use our libraries or apps if they don’t use our desktop environment. c) the community reason: as has been said a number of times, many of us yearn for a greater sense of belonging in the workspace efforts. whether that is stuff like bluetooth, network integration, desktop wallet, panels, desktop layers, window management .. it all really belongs together in that it is written to be used together. to be usable together we need to work together. to work together we are helped by having a common identity. so we need a name we all share. the current working title has been “Plasma Workspaces 2". there are 3 parts to the PW2 name: 1. Plasma 2. Workspaces 3. ‘2’ so, one at a time: 1. Plasma is a brand that has already received a good amount of investment, and we need a distinct nomenclature from ‘KDE’. we can’t just use “Workspace” either, with the idea of using “KDE Workspaces” because then what do we call Desktop vs Netbook vs Tablet? if “KDEK Workspaces” were the name, then we’d end up with KDE Tablet Workspace which sounds dreadful and is completely non-descript. KDE Workspace Tablet is grammatically awkward to the point of being wrong in English. 2. “Workspaces”gives us a way to umbrella all the Plasma primary UX that we provide (desktop, netbook, mediacenter, tablet, ... whatever comes in future). that said, “Workspaces” is the least meaningful bit of the 3 words. without it we have just KDE Plasma. the reason we added Workspaces was to differentiate between the user products and the underlying technology. we do, however, refer to it as Plasma Desktop (no workspaces in there), Plasma Active, etc. “Workspaces” is also a word that most people do not know / understand until it is explained. this contributes to the weakness of this part of the nomenclature. it does allow us to say, however, things like “KDE Plasma Workspaces includes Plasma Destkop, Plasma Active ..” which rolls off the tongue nicely. however, we could do the same without making Workspaces a proper part of the name and just use it a regular noun in conjuction with the name “KDE Plasma”. this would result in phrasing like: “KDE’s Plasma workspaces come in Desktop, Netbook, Tablet and Mediacenter flavours...” “KDE’s Plasma provides user experiences for desktop, netbook, tablet, ..” given that we are moving to a “grand unified shell” approach where the different user experiences flow seamlessly from one to the next, it may make sense to drop the concept that there is such huge differentiation that they are the “Workspaces” and instead are just “Plasma” which happens to morph to fit the device. 3. ‘2’ ... why “two” if this is version 5? well, libplasma is actually going to be version 6 iirc, so it isn’t the library. i also am not a big believer in branding after version numbers. neither are any of our proprietary competitors who have a lot more marketing and communications savvy than we tend to. ;) what i like about 2 is: * it communicates this is something after the first. it’s that whole “two point oh” thing, though hopefully less hype than, say, “web 2.0” ;) * it’s simple and direct * ‘2’ is a couple, and a couple is a nice human idea :) this is borne out by the “1, 2, many” pattern in many ancient languages. we know 1, we know 2, after that it’s just an abstract concept. Sooo ... here is my proposal: We call it Plasma 2 and use that as a rallying call to focus on its unified user experience across the spectrum of devices people use today. as developers, it will remind us of our goals. to our users, it will be the symbol of this idea of all these individual components that work together beautifully no matter what device you put it on. yes, this means we drop “Workspaces” as clumsy, hard to understand and no longer fully applicable. Other proposals, ideas, tweaks to the above most welcome, but let’s try to come to a consensus on this matter before the
