Thread titleRepliesLast modified
Notes for Jan 26222:24, 26 January 2016
Vision pitch020:43, 15 January 2016

Notes for Jan 26

Quick notes for the version [1]:

  • Can we separate technical stuff from the general vision? Even many programmers can't parse "binary compatibility" for example. A good test is to give it to read a (typical) grandma.
  • Can we and slash half of the text? It's enough to have 'Free Software' with a proper link to (wikipedia?) instead of explaining the freedoms and that 'it allows commercial use'
  • Similarly slash the explanation like 'Our software uses strong encryption algorithms, and comes without any backdoors, hidden monitoring, or data collection.' by the next big think of FOSS: security and privacy. Just provide link to already existing materials from guys that explain things very well -- EFF, etc.
  • I am also sceptical regarding declarations that split the Qt community: building on top of Qt vs offering extensions working aside. I know no solution though: KDevelop is really a competition to Qt Creator. Many KDE's initiatives were born in a pre-Creator era. There must be a niche for apps that made a lot of sense in these old times but it's a niche within FOSS, so very small. Any visions (that have to help us to develop) are hard to push if we're silently ignoring the issues. It does not matter what app is better. Nobody wins if either app loses.
    • A bit similar 'bad timing' issue is with qbs vs cmake. Our favourite is obvious, FOSS community won't be helping qbs to grow. Unfortunate, and I see no solution.
  • Android. Please FIRST show two (two not one) releases of successful hardware that's not Jolla-like Android adaptation but a genuine phone or tablet and we can think about mentioning this in a vision. For now I'd go with whatever mobile offering/integration is (realistically!) marketed by the Qt Company. In the vision page we can write anything, but first I'd ask those that spend money and life on the idea and failed (not because of technical mistakes but business reasons => politics).
    • I believe if embedded projects would want anything from us, they take the stuff from the KF5 level. Well I am doing it this way for my customer. Cherry-pick. Nobody except those that have just money to spend will take entire layer(s) or entire platform. Not because there are technical mistakes at our side but because the (good or bad) desire of having more things under control and even simpler reason: to actually have more work on site. More man-years means more important project. Decision-makers so often think this way. NIH. I'd say this after working for years quite close to them.
20:45, 26 January 2016

"can we separate technical stuff from the vision"

  • I added those (stable, compatibility guarantees, commercial use) so a potential reader knows immediately that our stuff is not just cool, but also reliable, which I think is important to 3rd party developers.

"can we slash half of the text ,Free software etc.  ?"

  • much of that was suggested by Alex Dymo. I don't have a strong opinion on this.

"privacy and encryption"

  • mentioning privacy in some way is good I think. Mentioning encryption etc. was suggested by Alex Dymo. I wouldn't mind making this shorter.

"declarations that split the Qt community"

  • what exactly do you mean ? Mentioning the IDE ? Alex Dymo's point was that an IDE is typically part of an SDK, so it should be mentioned. As above, I don't have a strong opinion on this.


  • I guess you refer to the "user interface for mobile Linux" ? I agree that the chance that this becomes relevant is small, but Blue Systems is actually spending money on it. This here is just a draft, a starting point for discussion in the bigger community, I would leave it in.
  • from your comment I think you agree to mentioning Android as target in the section "end-user applications" ?
  • "embedded systems": I agree, KF5 is what is obviously useful for 3rd-party developers. But, IF Plasma Mobile matures, it might actually become an useful platform for embedded systems. If that happens, it would be cool.
21:57, 26 January 2016

Thanks Alex, I see we're moving forward. Good. Yes, Android. And Qt embedded solutions. The offering is centered around KF5. We'll think what next when Plasma gets. I don't see a reason for influencing vision based on what part of KDE is currently more sponsored. This is hard to admit. Similarly other parties 'sponsor' Akonadi-next and could put emphasis on this. I feel uneasy about such things. So back to KF5 - it's _the_ core stuff having origins in KDE and most workforce evenly spread across KDE community. This is unique. And the eventual product is so multi-purpose, so it's a kind-of safer bet.

22:24, 26 January 2016

Vision pitch

This may be helpful:

So, should we change the first sentence ? Like "The vision of KDE, a community of .. enthusiasts, is that end -users can use free software GUI applications on their devices across the complete device spectrum, ..."

20:43, 15 January 2016

This page was last edited on 14 March 2016, at 12:50. Content is available under Creative Commons License SA 4.0 unless otherwise noted.