kde-www Digest, Vol 238, Issue 5

[Phu Hung Nguyen]

On 09/01/2023 09:29, kde-www-request at kde.org wrote:
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2023 17:57:53 +1100
> From: AnnoyingRains <annoyingrain5 at gmail.com>
> To: kde-www at kde.org
> Subject: SoK - searching for mentor for
> Message-ID:
> 	<CALYH9HbcvbovpDzKMXgVeYGgsKuT15=hpwa761zPkbWXeeT75g at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hey KDE web team! I am a SoKDE student who would like to submit a proposal
> for a project I would like to work on for SoKDE.
>
> I have already submitted this proposal on season.kde.org
>
> My proposal is:
>
> A website that has downloads for Windows and MacOS for all KDE
> software that builds for those platforms.
>
> As currently downloads for these platforms are spread to the four
> winds, making it difficult to get KDE software on those platforms
> Also, the current "solution" for this on Windows is the Microsoft
> Store having many of the KDE apps, although I would argue that this
> isn't actually fixing the issue for many people, as many windows users
> not only hate the Microsoft Store, meaning it is barely used, but many
> users wouldn't even look there for our software, and default to
> googling it.
>
> The Binary Factory is the best option right now, but the Binary
> Factory isn't a good endpoint for users in my opinion, and can easily
> confuse people as it is more designed for developers instead of
> end-users. Also, the Binary Factory often produces
> nightly/experimental releases instead of stable releases.
>
> Perhaps this above idea could be merged with apps.kde.org?
>
> Some screenshots showing how different what apps.kde.org shows is from
> what available on the Microsoft store and the Binary Factory are
> attached.
>
> Last point, yes I know that the binary factory is being deprecated and
> replaced with Gitlab CI, I have just used it as an example here as it
> has almost all KDE projects at the moment.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> - Kye Potter

Hi Kye Potter,

I think apps.kde.org already can do what you propose, although 
improvements are still needed.

The differences you see between apps.kde.org's "Windows" list and "KDE 
e.V." list on Microsoft Store are:

- Krita and GCompris: publishers of these are "Krita" and "Timothée 
Giet" respectively, so you won't find them on Microsoft Store by looking 
for "KDE e.V.", but they are there, and you can find the links on 
apps.kde.org;

- KTimeTracker, RKWard, and Ruqola: other than apps with a Microsoft 
Store link, apps.kde.org's "Windows" list also contains apps whose 
AppStream data has a "Releases" section with an artifact for "Windows" 
platform. The 3 apps fall into this category.

Whether to include apps with a Binary Factory artifact for Windows or 
macOS into apps.kde.org's "Windows" list or "macOS" list, respectively, 
is another decision that we need more discussion to make. Anyway, if we 
want to, we can do that, and then those apps.kde.org lists will contain 
all apps in corresponding lists on Binary Factory, achieving what you 
propose here.

The question we need to ask ourselves, I think, is: "who are the target 
users of such a website?". You want to show all KDE apps that build for 
a specific platform, but who need to see that? If you answer 
"developers", then Binary Factory (and later GitLab CI) is probably fine 
already. And if the answer is "end users", then I'm not sure which apps 
end users want to know, apps that *build* for a platform, or apps that 
are actually *released* for that platform. That's also why apps.kde.org 
"Windows" list currently contains apps as I describe above: we are not 
sure if it's a good idea when a user looks into the list, finds an app 
with only a nightly build link on Binary Factory, installs that and 
later thinks we release unready software.

So, how do you think?

Regards,
Phu