[kde-community] RFC: Distribution outreach program

[Martin Graesslin]

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 10:46:26 AM CET Nicolás Alvarez wrote:
> > On Feb 3, 2016, at 10:16, Martin Graesslin <mgraesslin at kde.org> wrote:
> > 
> > On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 9:44:13 AM CET Nicolás Alvarez wrote:
> >>>> On Feb 1, 2016, at 15:31, Cornelius Schumacher <schumacher at kde.org>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>> On Monday 01 February 2016 13:04:37 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>> I'm not against automated testing at all, I just think it doesn't work
> >>>> at
> >>>> the highest level and bears pitfalls of distros gaming the system, or
> >>>> people actually care more about the number of points they get than the
> >>>> actual user experience.
> >>> 
> >>> I think we have to readjust the perspective here a bit. I really
> >>> appreciate
> >>> Thomas' initiative because there definitely could be better
> >>> collaboration
> >>> between distributions and KDE. We have the common goal to get our
> >>> software
> >>> to users in the best possible shape. We shouldn't see that as a gaming,
> >>> blaming, or judging, but we should see this as an opportunity to work
> >>> together in a better way. How this is then expressed to the public is a
> >>> second thought, and should be decided together with the distributions.
> >>> 
> >>> So defining and discussing criteria which make up a good experience,
> >>> listing and communicating requirements, talking to each other about what
> >>> is missing, what needs to be fixed, and where it should be fixed without
> >>> playing upstream- downstream-ping-pong, sharing and possibly aligning
> >>> roadmaps, all these things and more could happen through the
> >>> distribution
> >>> outreach program. This would be really wonderful.
> >>> 
> >>> In essence I think this is about better communication between KDE and
> >>> distributions, so that we can productively work on what needs to be
> >>> fixed,
> >>> avoid misunderstandings, and keep a common momentum.
> >> 
> >> Here is an idea that shouldn't be novel but I have yet to see mentioned.
> >> 
> >> If you see a distro doesn't package KDE software correctly, doesn't
> >> integrate with the system, doesn't provide a good user experience for
> >> whatever reason... file a bug on the distro's bug tracker. Instead of
> >> putting the distro on a user-facing "they don't do things good enough"
> >> list.
> > 
> > You haven't seen this one proposed, because it just doesn't work. Do you
> > really think nobody reports bugs about incorrectly packaged stuff? Or that
> > we don't talk to the distros? Do you know how often we get answers like
> > "well I would like to, but we have $POLICY". I could give you examples
> > like outdated Qt in Kubuntu, broken cursors on Fedora, missing Wayland in
> > openSUSE Leap, no way to suspend in Devuan, etc. etc. - I could name you
> > a $POLICY issue for each distro.
> > 
> > Sorry once you have done this for years, you realize this approach doesn't
> > work. Personally I'm pretty fed up with the state our software is in, in
> > various distributions. I'm sick of having to take the blame for it. This
> > approach hasn't worked, we need to look for new ways.
> 
> So we're going to shame them into complying by leaving them out of a list?
> They'll pay attention to our wiki more than to their policies? Several
> people in this thread mentioned distro policies as a reason why this won't
> work, in fact.

No, that's not what I'm saying. First of all we need to realize that we have a 
big problem (yay for Thomas), second we need to find a solution to the problem. 
Currently we are brainstorming ideas and I think that needs to continue. But 
pretending there is no problem and continue as we used to work, does obviously 
not solve the problems.

Personal note: as some might have noticed I'm deeply disappointed with the 
state of our software in distros. And I'm envious to Unity which has Ubuntu 
and Cinnamon which has Mint and GNOME Shell which has Fedora Workstation. And 
OSX which has OSX and Windows which has Windows.

Cheers
Martin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-community/attachments/20160203/80d0283d/attachment.sig>