[kde-community] KDE Mission - let's do this!

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

On Donnerstag, 28. April 2016 18:23:51 CEST Aleix Pol wrote:

> > To fulfill our vision, KDE has taken on the mission to create products
> > which> 
> >  - give users control, freedom and privacy
> >  - convince them - through excellent user experience - to switch away from
> > 
> > products which don't give them that
> > 
> >  - reach them where they are
> 
> The convincing part is implicit in the reaching out (i.e. point 2 is in 3).
> As second point, I would mention that we want to offer quality user
> experience. Or maybe I didn't understand you.

Hm, is it really implicit? Reaching users where they are alone does not 
automatically convince them to "come to the good side", does it? At least not 
for me, but maybe it's implicit for others.

And does "through excellent user experience" not cover "quality user 
experience"?
 
> > To provide control, freedom and privacy, KDE's products
> > - allow users to "tinker" with them.
> 
> This tinkering can be tricky. We allow tinkering as soon as we provide
> the source code, in fact. And so does any other FOSS project.

Sure, but our software usually allows a lot of tinkering without the need to 
go into the source code. For me, e.g. the flexibility Plasma offers falls 
already under "tinkering". Maybe the word triggers the wrong associations, 
though.
Ideas for what to replace it with?

> > - apply open standards to prevent "lock-in"
> 
> Apply reads weird. Leverage? Use?

Hm, "apply" still appears fitting for me, but "use" works, too, of course.

> > - never collect or transmit information about users without their explicit
> > consent ("opt-in")
> 
> That's really hard to do and could be cumbersome. For example, is
> akregator sending information about users data?
> Is Discover (through apt?).
> Everything we use is data and using data generates data.

Good point. What I'm referring to is that we don't collect data on some 
servers. Collecting and using data locally is fine because they're still under 
the user's control. Maybe 
"Never transmit traceable information about users outside their device without 
their explicit consent (opt-in)"?

> > To create a convincing user experience, KDE's products aim to
> > - have consistent, easy to use human interfaces
> > - provide users with _at least_ the features and quality they expect
> > coming
> > from non-free products
> 
> This suggests non-free products are better. Needs rewording.

In reality, while we are better than proprietary products in some areas, we're 
sill only trying to catch up with them in others. You are right, though, that 
the goal should always be to be better. so:

"-provide users with better quality / features than what they're used to from 
non-free products"

> > - be at the forefront of emerging trends like mobile/desktop convergence
> 
> This text will probably need to be reviewed soon, I guess :D.

Our assumption always was that the mission is much more in flux than the 
vision, so I think it's okay to pick up current trends in the mission.

> > To reach users where they are, KDE
> > - strives to make our products available on major Free but also
> > proprietary
> > operating systems and platforms, mostly by applying Qt as a technology
> > that
> > allows easy portability
> 
> Interesting, again needs careful wording.

What would you change about the wording?

> > - aims for a presence on all relevant device classes (desktop, mobile,
> > embedded)
> 
> We've never been on embedded as KDE (maybe KDE Frameworks have been
> there though).
> I'd find a better word to say "end-user devices". If we ever do
> embedded, we can update it.

So is embedded not even our goal at the moment? I think it should be. The 
sentence says "aims for", not "currently does".

> > - continues to offer a "classic desktop" product which makes the switch
> > from proprietary operating easy
> > - offers products that also inter-operate with proprietary software,
> > formats and services in order to ease the transition to Free
> > alternatives.
> Is offering integration of proprietary services needed to be
> mentioned? It's a strategy we might adopt (to reach out) but it's not
> our mission. The mission is to have the "good services" adopted (by a
> definition of good services). Or not. Up for discussion.

For me that's an important part of reaching users where they are. From my 
perspective, the strategy should be "Allow them to use the proprietary service 
they're used to, but show them how much better they'd be off if they used our 
product with the free alternative."

For example, Kontact and Kube _should_ work with e.g. Google services, but 
show their full potential when used with Free groupwares such as Kolab.
Or I would want Dolphin to work with Google Drive, but I want it to work best 
with e.g. ownCloud.

> HTH,
> Aleix

Thank you a lot for your feedback!