share-like-connect in 4.10

[David Edmundson]

On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:25 PM, Aaron J. Seigo <aseigo at kde.org> wrote:
> 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.

http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-devel&m=134719380110887&w=2

>
> 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 was trying to deliberately keep my opinions out of it, to not
distract from the point you should ask application maintainers before
doing something that directly affects sharing in their apps.
Particularly those that already use KIPI's sharing, which hopefully
will be made redundant and dropped.(two different sharing systems
would be bad).

To some extent my opinions don't really matter one bit, but the
thoughts from whoever makes Gwenview, Digikam, Okular, etc. do.

You can't expect everyone to read plasma-devel, and know what plans are.

I'll try and write up my thoughts however (tomorrow night probably) so
we can go through them.

>
>> 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
> _______________________________________________
> Plasma-devel mailing list
> Plasma-devel at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
>