naming the next major release

[Martin Graesslin]

On Wednesday 21 August 2013 15:58:03 Daniel Nicoletti wrote:
> 2013/8/21 Martin Graesslin <mgraesslin at kde.org>:
> > On Wednesday 21 August 2013 13:52:06 Daniel Nicoletti wrote:
> >> 2013/8/21 Martin Graesslin <mgraesslin at kde.org>:
> >> > On Wednesday 21 August 2013 11:29:52 Daniel Nicoletti wrote:
> >> > this might change. Consider Razor/LXDE joining the KDE umbrella. What
> >> > then?
> >> > From one day to another it would be obvious that using "the KDE
> >> > desktop"
> >> > is
> >> > not working any more.
> >> 
> >> In that case what we will end up is with just KDE libraries? I mean
> >> people are used to "install/use KDE" which means the SC.
> > 
> > no?!? I fail to see what you want to tell us, I cannot follow your
> > thought. I guess it's based on you still think that KDE is not the
> > community but all the software we tend to release once half a year.
> 
> Sorry if it's hard to understand, so I'll try to put it into another way:
> * First I just wanted to say that I prefer Plasma 2 instead of 5, because it
> helps understanding the age and we have lots of other KDE components with
> different versions than 5.
> 
> * Second I'm saying that KDE is also the software because we do release a
>    KDE Software Compilation which has the KDE name.
ok, that I did not get at all :-) I personally also don't like 5 for the .0 
reason.
> 
> * I know we don't market the KDE desktop anymore, all the blog posts
>    around KDE still talk about it as a DE. Lots of friends that use KDE SC
>    don't even know what is plasma-desktop because for them it's KDE.
Yes I noticed that for example you still talk about KDE as software in your 
blog posts. To be honest I have to cringe if I read it, because it makes the 
task of everyone more difficult who tries to work on the repositioning of the 
brand.

It is important. If people from the outside think it's one coherent thing we 
wouldn't need efforts like frameworks to make it more attractive for 3rd party 
developers and it also makes any attempts to get KWin as the window manager 
for all Qt based shells much more difficult. Which is a reason why I do care 
about it.
> 
> For example what happens if I want my own shell (no I didn't write one :P )
> on the KDE SC?
> 
> The KDE community has to decide which will be the included, since plasma
> got there first there isn't much chance for a replacement, then better
> do like Razor.
does the KDE community have to decide? Did the community ever decide that 
there can only be one file manager in the SC? Also does software have to be in 
the SC? Or is software more blessed by being in the SC? Large part of the 
release announcement for 4.11 is about KScreen - to my knowledge it's not even 
released as part of the SC. What do you think is the more prominent music 
player by KDE? Amarok which is not part of the SC or juk which is part of the 
SC? Same for IM - kopete vs kpt.
> 
> I'm not against the KDE renaming, but I think we are getting
> to a point that having an Software Compilation becomes a
> problem. If Razor is now a KDE project they why only plasma
> is included?
Who said there will be a software compilation in the KF 5 world or that the 
Plasma Workspaces will be part of such a maybe existing software compilation? 
Please note that this has not yet been discussed, but I know that a few people 
in the Plasma team (me included) would favor to not have the SC anymore. The 
reasons you mention are a part of it. In fact the whole discussion highlights 
it. We would not need to think about a version number if Plasma would be part 
of the software compilation.

Cheers
Martin
-------------- 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/20130821/1a6bcdf7/attachment-0001.sig>