[kde-community] Why were there no talks about Ubuntu Mobile at Akademy?
carlsymons at gmail.com
Fri Aug 16 14:42:54 UTC 2013
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 7:04 AM, Michael Zanetti <mzanetti at kde.org> wrote:
> On Friday 16 August 2013 10:12:29 Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
>> On Friday, August 16, 2013 01:49:56 you wrote:
>> > Anyways, the question is why Canonical didn't have any talks about Ubuntu
>> > Touch. I personally found it a bit weird and wouldn't have expected that
>> > this years akademy was so much about mobile phone platforms *not* related
>> > to KDE. Actually I would have hoped to see some Vivaldi prototypes or
>> > demos
>> > instead of all those other platforms. Looking from that point of view, it
>> Vivaldi is a hardware product to put Plasma Active on. It does not have a
>> monopoly on KDE interests, and I (and others involved) have no desire nor
>> expectation for exclusive interest and attention from KDE. Plasma itself
>> was, of course, represented in talks at Akademy.
> Yet you expect Canonical to have those interests...
The situations for Vivaldi (MakePlayLive) and Ubuntu Touch (Canonical)
are different. There needs to be a clear distinction and delineation
between Vivaldi and Plasma Active because of the different levels of
involvement by the principal players for each company. MPL has to
guard against the perception of a conflict of interest. When
Shuttleworth or Canonical equate Aaron with KDE, that issue is
>> There is no reason that there can not be multiplicity of mobile efforts
>> around KDE and Qt, and so I think it makes perfect sense to see all those
>> other platforms.
> Sure. I just wouldn't have expected that.
>> In fact, if we can manage to attract multiple platforms there will be more
>> sources of input and support to our shared core technologies. We may even be
>> able to break through some of the more baseless conceptions about
>> competition and be able to cooperate more on non-differentiating
>> If we want any hope of any of these minority platforms thriving we have to
>> start looking at it as both/and and pull in as many camps working on
>> relevant technologies as we can.
>> So I think it makes perfect sense that there were these other platforms
>> Also, just as Ubuntu Phone is quietly using KDE Technology, I understand
>> Jolla is as well. We also share efforts on Mer. With Blackberry we have the
>> least in common, but we are collaborating on packaging formats with them
>> and they are a big supporter and contributor to QML these days. We have
>> commonalities and if Akademy can be the Big Tent we meet under, all the
>> more power to KDE.
>> p.s. The main reason there wasn’t anything more about Vivaldi (or, for that
>> matter, Bodega) is that I did not attend Akademy this year due to the birth
>> of my second child being expected around the same time. The others who work
>> on the project either do not usually attend Akademy or gave talks on Plasma
>> this year.
> All fine with me. I just don't understand why it is a problem if Canonical
> doesn't give a talk at akademy but its no problem for everyone else.
Going back to the original post...
Jos wrote and agreed that his intention was along the lines of "what
KDE did wrong because it did not attract [much] Canonical people and
how can KDE try to get more Canonical people next time" (someone
Jos and I spent many hours preparing for a presentation about
marketing at Akademy . The tenor of that talk was what KDE can do
for ourselves. It was not about what other people or companies need to
do for KDE. The video of Jos's talk is available at the link .
In addition, Jos wrote:
"They [Canonical] DID know that the single largest bunch of qualified
Qt/QML developers was having a meeting in Spain, did they?"
Several responses related this only to KDE. You DID know that the Qt
Contributors Summit was co-located with Akademy, right? "The Qt
Contributors Summit (aka QtCS) is the main event of the Qt Project.
It’s a hands on gathering to get things done and plan ahead." (from
the qt-project website).
Jos's rhetorical question ties into one of the key points in his
Akademy presentation--_we_ need to do a better job of promoting KDE's
value to the Qt ecosystem.
The weird part of this discussion for me is how Canonical became the
victim, how Jos's comment were intended to "bash Canonical at every
More information about the kde-community