Re: [kde-artists] We need a Vision!
Björn Balazs <[email protected]> Wed, 12 Mar 2014 11:31:07 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.kde.artists,gmane.comp.kde.devel.guidelines,gmane.comp.kde.usability,gmane.comp.kde.promotion |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <5492826.SFqmvsKybC@rechenknecht> |
Am Dienstag, 11. März 2014, 19:34:53 schrieb Jos Poortvliet: > On Tuesday 11 March 2014 16:00:52 Heiko Tietze wrote: > > On Tuesday 11 March 2014, 15:25:46 Jos Poortvliet wrote: > > > I am a little skeptical - we're a very diverse community and I don't > > > think > > > you can draft ONE vision for all of KDE - especially considering we're > > > trying to expand what KDE is further and further (improv is hardware, > > > bodega & owncloud & ghns are server, there's mobile, tablet, ...). But > > > that > > > note can and should be part of any discussion... > > > > Only 12 people follow your argumentation and voted for "I don't think we > > need a generic vision statement because...". > > > > Result of votes (multiple answers allowed): > > * Powerful, yet easy to use (46%, 132 Votes) > > * Elegant software (42%, 121 Votes) > > * All-purpose full-featured software (38%, 111 Votes) > > * KDE: a community for all people (28%, 81 Votes) > > * Cutting edge technology (27%, 78 Votes) > > * KDE: Qt5 at its best (15%, 44 Votes) > > * I don't think we need a generic vision statement because... (4%, 12 > > Votes) > > > > In my opinion the vision should be something similar to what Kver > > suggested: “Be the framework of people and software for the majority of > > computing in 10 years time.” Despite of the 'tomorrow we rule the world' > > notion it involves all applications and flavors of KDE. All other aspects > > (powerful, elegant, feature rich etc.) would be bottom line text. As a > > side node: the discussion seems to be of interest for many people and was > > picked up by Golem [1], a German IT news page. > > > > Actually, all projects should define own visions based on the common one. > > The HIG [2] includes purpose and how-to, as well as a reference to the > > common guideline. > > First of all, I'm not opposed to what you try to do, that is why I said I'd > be happy to join. I said I'm skeptical to the SCOPE. But I'm always > difficult with the huge scope and ambitions of some people: I like ambition > but I've seen to many grand plans fail. Practical, itterative and down to > earth usually gets more done. > > Aside from what Carl said (and I agree with him), I think it makes sense to > create a vision for sub projects. The overall project - well, something like > "bringing Free Software to common users" or something would probably work > for everybody, but I doubt it helps you define a UX. > > What I am saying is that a vision specific enough to help you define a UX is > most likely a bad fit for at least parts of KDE's projects; and a vision > that fits all projects will not add anything real to the manifesto. > > If I were you, I'd try to define a vision for the Plasma Workspaces, then > sub visions for each of the form factors. Applications can confirm to those > visions if they care about the form factor and the workspace (many do, some > won't - I doubt Gcompris will ever want to be "full featured" or "cutting > edge"). Jos, I fully agree with you. Actually the scenario you describe might well be the result of the effort and would serve our desired purpose. Cheers, Björn > And again: as overall project vision, I'd look at the manifesto and see if > there's more to add. > > Let me add that this isn't the first time I've talked about vision: > http://blog.jospoortvliet.com/2008/05/vision-x.html > > Even had a survey and BoF: > http://blog.jospoortvliet.com/2008/08/innovation-in-kde.html > > I wrote a few blogs after that, talking about the point that most people > brought up: we're about Freedom. Which is also central in the Manifesto and > should indeed be at the core of any vision. > > Ad in 2010 we had some more debate about it: > http://blog.jospoortvliet.com/2010/06/flameworthy-linuxtag-notes.html > Ending with this: > http://blog.jospoortvliet.com/2010/06/being-free-why-it-matters.html > > Now I'm fine if you don't read all that - I just hope it convinces you that > I might be on to something when I say you should be a bit careful with > trying to define a KDE-wide vision ;-) > > > [1] > > http://www.golem.de/news/entwickler-community-kde-ueberarbeitet-projekt-zi > > e > > le-1403-104995.html [2] > > http://techbase.kde.org/Projects/Usability/HIG/Vision ______________________________________________________________________________ [email protected] | https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-artists