share-like-connect in 4.10

[Aaron J. Seigo]

On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 19:24:56 David Edmundson wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 4:22 PM, Marco Martin <notmart at gmail.com> wrote:
>  - blog about it

already done. several times. we need to do it more.

>  - make releases outside kde-workspace

already done. a couple times.

>  - get PPAs (and other OS equivalent) for testers of the software for
> people who want to use it.

not done.

i'd also add:

* documentation on techbase
* examples in kde-usability

& imho it's not either/or. we need to do all these things *and* schedule it 
for a specific future desktop release.

we also need to announce that sooner rather than later, so people will be able 
to use that as motivation to be writing plugins for it.

btw, the biggest thing holding us back from writing lots of plugins more 
easily for sharing is the lack of the Accounts API.

> Then you can build up to something actually ready before you push it
> on the mass users.

it already does rather useful things as it is.

> I also want to see this discussed properly on kde-devel and
> kde-usability. 

why kde-devel? and since when was kde-usability alive? note that SLC was 
designed with usability people involved from the start.

> It was mentioned on kde-devel, and as I recall it was
> met with "what's SLC?" to which nobody replied.

i must have missed that one. i've described it in the past on KDE lists. also 
blogged about it. it's been in PA releases.

perhaps an accurate observation might be that most people in KDE just don't 
pay attention to much of what is going on. which is fine: most are probably 
well and busy working on their own projects in what time they have.

> I'm certainly not convinced by the design on the desktop,

i'm sorry, this is too vague to be useful. *what* do you feel could use 
improving?

> I might be
> in the minority or that could be the general opinion. Either way you
> need to confirm with the wider community before pushing a change.

aside from evidently missing the last year of work we put into these things 
already (referencing primarily the work in Plasma Active), maintainership is 
not a crowd sourced position. so on, we don't need to confirm it with the wider 
community.

if you're concerned about testing and justifying both the theory and the 
usefulness behind it, again, i point you to the work done in Active. we 
specifically worked on it there first, where the threshold for experimentation 
is higher and the exposure from failures lower, before bringing it to the more 
conservative and needs-to-work-well desktop.

i'm 100% open to specifics of what can be improved (i already received one such 
point at Randa which was good, though sadly it was second-hand information; 
not sure why people can't just draft an email more often) as well as further 
testing.

i'm not open to bikeshedding, invitations for faux-peer input from the 
uninformed and unskilled, or to throwing maintainership and design process out 
the window.

-- 
Aaron J. Seigo
-------------- 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: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/plasma-devel/attachments/20121004/92d80f6b/attachment.sig>