Drafting a policy? [was: Re: Qt 3.2 requirement]

Daniel Stone daniel at fooishbar.org
Wed Jul 30 01:46:36 BST 2003

On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 02:25:37AM +0200, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
> On Wednesday 30 July 2003 02:06, Daniel Molkentin wrote:
> > On Wednesday 30 July 2003 00:04, Guillaume Laurent wrote:
> > >No. Ask a user which one he prefers :
> > >
> > >- get a better, more stable desktop in a shorter time, at the
> > > expense of upgrading some basic libs
> > >
> > >- get a buggier, less stable desktop in a longer time, but you won't
> > > have to update some basic libs.
> >
> > Nice set of questions ;) Why do you ask them if you choose them in a
> > way they are bogus to ask? Sounds like you missed a carrier as a
> > politican...
> > This all sounds like somebody (or some group) should sit down and
> > think about how such a thing could be realistically turned into
> > practice for KDE. Next step would be to post the results to
> > kde-policies where they should be discussed. If the result finds a
> > consensus, we should try to deploy it. We don't really have anything
> > to loose at that point, except for maybe some time. But I think we
> > can afford that. We should test it a bit in the 3.x phase and - if it
> > is useful - deploy it for 4.0. This is not meant as a policy that
> > should demotivate developers. It's in contrary something that should
> > enable the developers to employ certain techniques that help with the
> > issue. People were able to learn about and adapt d-pointers and other
> > BC- keeping measures, why not this?
> If Guillaume has missed a career as politician, you have missed a career 
> as bureaucrat ;-)
> Setting up policies for KDE doesn't work. Never. The only thing that 
> works is to put that what is already common sense among KDE 
> contributors into a policy. In this case I would consider it hopeless 
> to even try it.

Yeah, but if you can get consensus on a policy, that's your line in the sand
drawn. I've found this to be true in Debian: no matter how much consensus you
have, you'll always get people going off in different directions until someone
writes it down and goes, "There you go, I've said it".

I think a policy does certainly need to be agreed upon and written down.

Daniel Stone                                              <daniel at fooishbar.org>
http://www.kde.org - http://www.debian.org - http://www.xwin.org
"Configurability is always the best choice when it's pretty simple to implement"
  -- Havoc Pennington, gnome-list
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 240 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20030730/5d7cf3f9/attachment.sig>

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list