Looking around and thinking ahead

[Aaron J. Seigo]

On Thursday, December 12, 2013 17:30:47 Martin Klapetek wrote:
> I don't think it makes much sense to dismiss the one and only tossed in (so
> far anyway) simply because...well, I even don't know why. It's there. It's
> done. It's usable. Why not at least try it out and actually see if it meets
> the goals we're trying to reach?

because we have not set out the goals. those will necessarily be derived from 
decisions made in the larger design of the desktop shell. decisions made 
w/regards to notifications, for instance, can very well end up influencing the 
requirements.

> Instead we see just a blunt dismissal without any consideration. Which is

it was not a blunt dismissal of Eike’s plasmoid. it was the suggestion that 
instead of trying to figure out which of a N different implementations is most 
desirable, to start with setting our design goals clearly first.

not doing so is how we ended up with kickoff. it has served us very well, but 
most of us agree something better could be done.

so my suggestion was: don’t do it the same way.

there was *nothing* in my email that suggested that having gone through a 
design goals process we don’t end up precisely at Eike’s solution.

and if we do, we’ll then know why we have without guesswork.

> ok, but not something a maintainer should do imho. If only because it turns
> down good developers with interest in working on a particular problem. And

saying “no” is one of the most valuable things a maintainer does. in this 
case, the “no” was pointed at the idea of presenting solutions before we have 
questions.

> I don't like that these things even happen in our ranks. I'm happy to take

rejoice: you don’t have to worry about it any longer.

-- 
Aaron J. Seigo