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

[Alexander Neundorf]

On Monday, May 09, 2016 17:54:13 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> thank you all for the feedback!
> It seems we're now in a mode of fleshing out details, for which I find
> emails not optimal. Therefore, I've put up a my original of the draft on
> the Wiki [1] (where we can all edit it while keeping all revisions
> available), then I immediately created a first revision, trying to
> incorporate the ideas which were brought up in this thread.
> 
> I've also added promoting development of Free software in general as a goal,
> under which I've put creating libraries, mentoring and collaboration with
> other orgs sharing our values, since all that has become quite important
> for KDE over the years.
> 
> So, feel free to edit the Wiki page, or bring up points for further
> discussion here.
> 
> Let's finish our mission before we lose interest ;)

thanks for pushing :-)

No objections from my side, just a few thoughts, in no specific order:

* I don't like the term "reach <somebody> where they are", to me this always 
kind of implies that the person in question is currently somehow in a wrong 
place (in German: "die Leute da abholen, wo sie sind" :-/ )
Basically this is the "everyone" from the vision.
So maybe
"To be able to make the software available to everyone, KDE"... ?

* To me, "classic desktop" does not really fit into "reach users where they 
are" 

* One could argue that to provide control, freedom and privacy for users, 
KDE's products do not only need to have those properties, but the products 
actually need to cover a substantial range of the users needs.
IOW, e.g. by offering a range of niche nerdy applications, let's say 3D 
printer software and a desktop ruler, we wouldn't do much to achieve our 
vision.
So, should there be some mention of what we want to "produce" ?
Something like desktop, office, education, creation, etc. ?

* you mention "embedded". I haven't seen any comments here e.g. from KF5- or 
plasma-developers expressing strong interest.

* "on major [...] OS" -> "on all major [...] OS" ?

* "have consistent [...] interfaces", "available on major [...] OS, e.g. by 
applying Qt" can easily be interpreted that Qt (and our set of libraries) is 
used to achieve portability and consistent user interfaces, which could easily 
be interpreted as e.g. a gtk-application is not part of our mission...

* the two last points of "to create a convincing user experience" are quite 
generic and inconcrete, i.e. they don't add much tangible

Alex