[kde-community] KDE Mission - let's do this! : Feedback on survey draft

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

On Freitag, 20. Mai 2016 00:14:36 CEST Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Wednesday 18 May 2016 23:43:12 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> ...
> 
> > I have created a survey draft at
> > http://survey.kde.org/index.php/858172/lang-en
> > 
> > Now please everybody click through it and give feedback on anything that
> > you think should be changed.
> > 
> > Once it feels like we agree on the survey, I'll publish it on the Dot and
> > on the kde-community and kde-devel mailing lists, hoping to reach most
> > KDE contributors and interested users.
> 
> here are a few comments:
> 
> 
> Section "Support for services"
> ------------------------------
> - there's a typo "servies"

Thanks, fixed.

> - the first point says "Focus more in [free services]", the third point says
> "Focus on [dominating services]". I would put the "more" also in the third
> point. Or maybe for both use "prioritize support for [Free/dominating]
> services" ?

Good point! I'll go for "prioritize support". It's a bit more difficult 
language, but also more clear on the other hand.

> 
> Section "I consider myself"
> ---------------------------
> 
> I consider myself as "formerly very active, now only sporadically active,
> and still cares a lot". Which should I check ?

Hm, so how about
... a regularly active KDE contributor
... a sporadically active KDE contributor
... a formerly active KDE contributor who still cares about KDE

Would that work?

> Section "To promote the development of Free software in general"
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> There's the option "...provide ... libraries which  facilitate the
> development of ... Qt applications".
> Personally I agree with this point, but not necessarily  as "promote ...
> Free software", but as a useful tool for developers, also for proprietary
> applications (... to pull also those developers into KDE).
> Can we make that somehow into a question ?
> Maybe
> "Should KDE libraries target mainly
> * free software developers
> * both free and proprietary software developers" ?
 
The reason why I listed libraries only under that aspect is that I wanted to 
make sure that all aspects of the mission relate to the vision.

Is getting new contributors for our libraries (and by extension to KDE in 
general) the reason why we make them available for proprietary applications as 
well?
In that case, how does that relate to our vision?
 
> Misc
> ----
> 
> * I'd like to have a point like "reliable, backwards compatible and stable"
> somewhere. Maybe in "How important are the following aspects" ?

Ok, I can add that to the user experience point.
I'm not sure if "backwards compatible" is clear enough, though. Backwards 
compatible regarding what? Data formats?
And what is the difference between "stable" and "reliable" in this regard? 

> * Should there be a question about the group of users ? Or do we just assume
> all users are equally important ? Like
> - home users
> - business/office users
> - schools/universities/(kindergarten ?)
> - developers
> - FLOSS geeks

A question about our target audience makes sense, yes. I've added one with 
these options:

"Regular" home users
Free software enthusiasts
Business/ office users
Students (at schools or universities)
Children
Developers
System administrators
"Specialists" (e.g. scientists, engineers, artists, ...)
Everyone
 
> * Would it make sense to have two additional levels, like "absolutely must"
> and "not at all, never" ? (I would consider many points very important, but
> a few exceptionally, absolutely must).

Hm. I could change the labels for the extremes to "Not useful at all" and 
"Essential". Not sure if the scale should be extended to 7, though.
 
> * I'm not too happy with the "How should KDE treat Free vs. Proprietary OS"
> section.
> E.g. for Windows and OSX vs. Linux and FreeBSD I would say "equally", which
> translates to "make Windows and OSX first class targets" (while they are
> second class right now).
> OTOH, does Android count as Free or proprietary ?
> And, when asking focus on Android or Plasma Mobile, I would actually say
> getting KDE applications onto Android is more important, since that we
> millions of users can quickly benefit from all the advantages (freedom,
> control, etc.) KDE provides.
> Could the survey ask something like
> "How should KDE treat the following OS
> - Linux
> - FreeBSD
> - Other BSDs, Hurd, etc.
> - Windows
> - OSX
> - Mobile Linux (Mer, Plasma Mobile ?)
> - Android
> - did I forget something ?
> with the two options "important" and "not so important"

This sounds like it's interesting to find out, but I'm not sure if it's the 
right scope for the Mission. Do we really want the mission to be so detailed 
that it mentions the importance of specific operating systems?

> * Related to the target OS, should there be a question something like
> "What do you consider more important for a KDE application running outside
> the Plasma desktop, e.g. on Windows, OSX, Android:
> - that it integrates well with other KDE applications on that platform and
> works as similar as possible to running under Plasma
> - that it integrates as good as possible with the desktop environment it is
> running in/it tries to fullfill the expections of users on that platform ?"

Interesting question, but again: Should that be part of the Mission?
I'd like to keep this survey on the same level as we want the mission to be 
on. Details which are interesting but out of scope for the mission should be 
asked in a separate survey.
 
> * should there be a question asking what kind of application spectrum KDE
> should try to cover ?
> Something like
> - anything that is free and useful
> - applications with a state of the art user interface (typically a GUI)
> - applications that cover as much as possible of the everyday needs of a
> home user" ?

Not sure. Can't that already be derived from the question about the target 
audience?

> Thanks
> Alex

Thank you for the feedback!