Plasma naming scheme

[Jens Reuterberg]

On Monday 05 January 2015 01:34:17 Aleix Pol wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Thomas Pfeiffer 
<thomas.pfeiffer at kde.org> wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> > while writing up a vision for Plasma interaction, the VDG noticed 
that it
> > was unclear exactly what terms to use when referring to Plasma 
Desktop
> > specifically, so we thought it would make sense to clarify this.
> > 
> > Therefore, we went ahead and drafted some communication 
guidelines I'd
> > like to present for discussion:
> > 
> > - When talking about the the Plasma technology generically, use 
only
> > "Plasma", omitting the "5" as that is just an iteration of Plasma.
> > 
> > 
> > - When talking about a particular version of the technology, but 
not a
> > specific shell, use "Plasma [version]" e.g. "Plasma 5.1".
> > 
> > - When talking about the a specific shell but not about a specific
> > version,
> > use "Plasma [shell], e.g. "Plasma Desktop"
> > 
> > - When talking about a specific shell in a particular version, use 
> > "Plasma
> > [version] [shell]" e.g. "Plasma 5.2 Desktop", "Plasma 5.4 Active"
> > 
> > For example in release announcement we'd talk about the 
Plasma 5.2 release
> > and when there are shell specific changes we could write "Plasma 
Desktop
> > now has addition X"
> > 
> > Does that make sense to everyone? And if so: Where should we 
publish it
> > and
> > where should we announce it?
> 
> Well, it's still weird as Plasma is more than a technology. Also 
note
> there's a Plasma framework.
> 
> To me, the biggest problem with this is that you're just covering part
> of it here, given that Plasma is not only the shell(s) but the entire
> solution as well (kwin, system settings, some of the apps) or 
maybe
> not.
> 
> I've always missed something there, many people have tried to 
explain
> it to me, maybe I'm a bit hard.
> 
> Aleix
> 
> PS: thanks for raising the issue, I keep failing to explain it
> baltasar (kdeblog.com) or, well, we even fail to discuss Plasma in 
the
> office, where we often end up saying "plasma? which plasma?"
> _______________________________________________
> Plasma-devel mailing list
> Plasma-devel at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel

What we need is a way to simply describe the desktop IN AN 
APPEALING way that still allows for version number should the 
need arise. One way is going the Mac route and name the desktop 
things. The tricky bit there is that considering the number of releases 
we have this may fast become a very long list of animals (or 
whatever it might be).

We do have a massive communications issue - on the upshot 
"Plasma 5" is getting more and more foothold.

Also sidenote, its "Maybe I'm a bit thick" not "hard" Aleix... ehm ...  :)