Battery Monitor revamp

[Aaron J. Seigo]

On Monday, May 27, 2013 11:13:40 Dario Freddi wrote:
> Such a choice has only one possible outcome: distributions and users
> patching the plasmoid for restoring the functionality, hidden or not,
> resulting in harder bug triaging and higher chances for breakage.

the hostage situation. no thanks.

there is no point in doing any design or having any thing resembling a plan if 
a minority group gets to outvote that vision with the threat of patches.

free software allows modification. that's *awesome*. so people who disagree can 
modify.

when you modify, you take on a certain amount of responsibility.

there is no way to 'fix' that feature of freedom in free software.

which means one either adopts a "no design, just the chaos of all the patches" 
approach or one accepts that some will make modifications that you disagree 
with downstream while preserving a design that makes sense and works for those 
who do not do so.

so, no, this is not a reason (let alone a good one) for doing anything 
differently.

-- 
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/20130528/d9a848cf/attachment.sig>