Gwenview Telemetry (was Re: The KIPI fate)

[o lu]

On 4/16/22 18:49, Johannes Zarl-Zierl wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 17. April 2022, 00:01:53 CEST schrieb o lu:
>> Developers having information like this will eliminate the need for
>> conversations like this...
> Not really. Usage data could play a role in informing part of the discussion
> ("which plugins are actively used?"), but won't change the big picture:

FWIW, I just jumped in part of the conversation because it was the first 
message in my inbox...
But what I was trying to express was that if a significant number of 
users are still using, let's say, a plugin, then you probably don't want 
to remove that because it is (in my mind) a breaking change.  If I 
upgrade my app(lication), and all of a sudden something doesn't work, 
then I'm pissed (very disappointed for non-English speakers).

> 1. There is a legacy technology (kipi) that used to be great but was in
> decline for many years before it was abandoned by its authors.
> Nobody stepped up to rescue the old technology.

You could vendor it and incrementally move it to the new technology.

> 2. There is a newer technology (purpose) that fits at least the part of the
> use-case that is discussed here (export plugins).
>
> 3. The new technology has not yet(?) implemented part of the functionality of
> the legacy technology [1]
> [1] https://phabricator.kde.org/T10525#189748
>
> 4. Nobody stepped up to port/implement the missing functionality for the new
> technology
Right, but is this a good enough reason to remove the old technology.  I 
don't know if it (kipi) still works, but if it does, you should leave it 
until the functionality is equivalent (or at least competitive in most 
cases -- most here is I guess subjective).
> So, yes, telemetry data could help us in making an informed choice where to
> put the effort. Still, somebody would need to actually do the work.
We do not disagree on that.
> Telemetry data would not change the discussion on two of the following three
> points:
>
> a. Do applications need to support both technologies even if they are very
> similar in scope?
I think it (almost) directly addresses this.
> b. Is having two slightly different plugin systems an acceptable user
> experience?
If it is transparent to the user, then ok.
> c. Is dropping support for the legacy technology an acceptable user
> experience?

My retort is, is having a lesser functionality an acceptable user 
experience. I would say no for KDE. This would go against my expectations.

> Cheers,
>    Johannes
>