[kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion

[Alexander Neundorf]

Hi,

On Friday, February 12, 2016 08:04:10 Martin Graesslin wrote:
> On Thursday, February 11, 2016 10:06:33 PM CET Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > On Thursday, February 11, 2016 10:06:57 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, February 10, 2016 10:08:19 PM Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 23:03:47 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
...
> > so do I understand correctly that in general you would consider projects
> > like a shell, a compiler and a text-mode editor as potential KDE projects
> > ?
> > 
> > What's your opinion on one of the original goals of KDE to provide a set
> > of
> > software with a consistent look & feel and usability, stuff like common
> > printing dialogs, file dialog, help systems, dialog layouts, etc, etc. ?
> > 
> > > > What about non-software projects like Project Gutenberg (free books),
> > > > Jamendo  (free indie music), SubSurfWiki.org (free knowledge) ?
> > > > Paraview (empowering students and scientists) ?
> > > 
> > > The draft states clear that we do Free software.
> > 
...
> > Where do you draw the line ?
> 
> Why should there be a line?

people have been asking exactly that wrt. to the focused vision all the time 
continuously, so I think the team of the inclusive-draft can also answer a few 
questions.

So I'd like to know too whether there are any technical limits or requirements 
for the Free software mentioned in the inclusive draft:
"KDE, through the creation of Free software, enables users to control their 
digital life. KDE software enables privacy, makes simple things
easy and complex scenarios possible while crossing device boundaries."

Until now the inclusive-team expressed that they don't see any technical 
requirements, as long as the motivation of the people behind the software 
projects matches ours.
I'd like to know whether I understand that correctly (and things like, as I 
said, compilers, curses tools, a shell, OS kernels, etc.) are considered just 
as good KDE projects as "classical" GUI software, or whether there is still an 
implied focus on GUI software ?

Also, one of the main motivations for the original KDE email was to get rid of 
the many different toolkits and instead provide a set of applications with a 
consistent, easy-to-use user interface.
>From what I read, it is not obvious to me whether this is still considered a 
priority.
What is the opinion of the inclusive-draft team to that ?

Alex