How about an inclusive "and" approach instead of fighting IRC versus something new? (was: Re: Collecting requirements for a KDE-wide instant messaging solution)

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

> On 10 Aug 2017, at 10:22, Luigi Toscano <luigi.toscano at tiscali.it> wrote:
> 
> Il 10 agosto 2017 10:24:08 EEST, Martin Steigerwald <martin at lichtvoll.de> ha scritto:
>> Martin Klapetek - 09.08.17, 16:12:
>>>> But KDE is not a tech startup. As people correctly wrote, KDE has a
>> very
>>>> long
>>>> history and contributors of all age. I'd rather be that than one of
>> the
>>>> many
>>>> tech startups with a bunch of little to no experience but fancy new
>> chat
>>>> systems, to be honest.  Do we really want and need to cater these
>> mystical
>>>> tweens so much?
>>> 
>>> Yes. Old contributors will slowly fade away for various
>>> reasons, be it life, be it lack of energy, be it other commitments.
>>> Who's going to pick all those projects up after them? I'd like
>>> to think that young enthusiasts with lots of energy and potential,
>>> exactly what those heroes starting the original KDE were.
>>> And I think we should strive to attract younger talent that can
>>> be in it for the long run.
>> 
>> Well, I wonder since reading several posts here about one thing:
>> 
>> To from reading this post and other posts I got the impression that is 
>> absolutely needs to be black or white:
>> 
>> *Either* IRC and nothing else *or* something new and nothing else.
>> 
>> Seriously?
>> 
>> I mean: Seriously?
>> 
>> 
>> There has been almost completely unnoticed posts mentioning bridges. Is
>> none 
>> of this bridges capable to work well enough for KDE community use
>> cases?
> 
> I see it differently; I see people wanting something that also works with IRC (so bridges, starting with the ones that already works) and people that don't want IRC even if it's working in the background without then having to care about it.

Who did ever say that? I certainly didn’t.
Throughout the entire discussion, I have always been 99.99% certain that we will end up with something that’s bridged to IRC.
Why would we not? There is not really a downside to it as long as the bridge works well, is there?

What I’ve argued strongly against is the standpoint that we should stick with the status quo.