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

[Martin Steigerwald]

Martin Klapetek - 10.08.17, 12:34:
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 3:24 AM, Martin Steigerwald <martin at lichtvoll.de>
> wrote:
> > 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?
> > 
> > Why do you see the need to exclude either one of the groups?
> 
> As you're quoting my email - where are you reading this?
> That's not what I wrote at. all. I merely stated that we should
> cater to younger engineers. Not once I suggested and will not
> suggest to disregard the old timers. That was twisted in replies
> following my email.

Martin, I noted a general impression I got from the thread.

You are right, you didn´t write that.

This either/or approach is what in my perception was in this thread since 
quite a while… probably not (always) explicitely written out… but between the 
lines.

It might have been wiser to choose a different post – or even just don´t quote 
any post at all –  to reply to with this.

Sorry.

Martin
-- 
Martin