Frameworks mailing list

Aaron J. Seigo aseigo at
Sat Nov 19 11:47:07 GMT 2011

On Thursday, November 17, 2011 18:17:30 Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> If the signal to noise ratio here is considered too low, then having the KF5
> discussions here
> * would have increased the signal, and thereby increased the SNR

this assumes that the tendency to noise on this list would not prevent 
attempts at high-signal communication. which is very probably what would have 
to hapenned.

the amount of time and energy i've spent on these topics here due to how we 
manage (or rather: do not manage) k-c-d is a good bit of evidence towards 

> * IMO would also have decreased the feeled need for the lengthy discussions
> taking place now, since people would feel better informed, which would
> decrease the noise, thereby increasing the SNR

the lengthy discussions here have had no bearing on anything that's been 
discussed on kde-frameworks-devel. in fact, the topics we've seen here were 
discussed on this very list months ago, making this entire aspect moot. 

people were able to be informed simply by reading k-c-d because that's where 
the discussions were had. in spite of that the "lengthy discussions" took 
place here anyways.

those working on frameworks did not want their "doing the work" discussions 
interupted with "justify why you are doing that work in that way in the first 
place" discussions (which is what we are seeing here on k-c-d).

so, i empathize with why there was a request for another list. 

that said, i personally agree with you (and others) that frameworks devel 
discussion _should_ happen here on k-c-d. to make that happen, we need to 
address the motivations for why kde-frameworks-devel was requested in the 
first place. 

essentially, we need to insist on a higher quality of discussion on k-c-d. 
that means actively discouraging long meta-discussions and actively 
encouraging productive interactions and contributions. someone needs to be 
able to perform this role consistently, without hesitation and with support of 
those who contribute to the kdelibs code.

k-c-d would, imho, be better for it, though i also am sure it would in the 
short term piss off a few people as they would lose a soapbox from which to 
repeatedly share their opinions. personally, i think that possible cost is 
well worth the benefits that would come withit.

Aaron J. Seigo
humru othro a kohnu se
GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA  EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43

KDE core developer sponsored by Qt Development Frameworks
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <>

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list