Andreas, I would not take a huge amount information away from the lengthy thread on the KDE Default Desktop issue. Certainly your Desktop Policy is a good idea but I would not get too carried away with its implementation. If we look at all the players of the very very very large thread on this subject we only see the actual voices are no more than approx 12 different people. This is a very very very small sample of usability expressions from a market and huge conclusions can not be taken with such a small sample. I am not suggesting we don't have a desktop Policy, but I think we need to send it out as a survey to all user email addresses we have. With every KDE installation, before an update server is added the software/hardware profile of every installation is sent to a "Novell Server' In gnome this information is sent to a completely different server, who's name escapes me right at this minute. As we really do have the data in comparing KDE/Gnome installations over a wide market place we need to use this information that has been gathered since 10.3. All the number and stats are ours for the taking. We only need to crunch the numbers from both these different sources to get more answers on desktop usage and other important statistics. The Gnome statistics are published to indicate hardware platform and PC vendor, but the numbers are there. I, and a lot of people, do not know where all this info is located on a 'Novell Server' in the case of KDE; but the numbers are there along with the other details. We need a much larger sample of statistics to make any meaning and substantiate change and get it right. After we drag up the numbers I am speaking about, I think we need to survey by sending out a survey to all the user emails we have before setting any policy in cement, and answer, with quantitative number ; our final draft Policy. The numbers of different use opinions in the huge discussion thread is far to small to be considered as the source for any user initiated change in policy. If I have missed any logic in the above please tell me. Scott Scott Adreas Jaeger wrote:
After reading all emails and having many discussions about the default desktop topic, I've wrote up the following draft proposal (at the end of my long email) and propose to enact it.
Note, let's keep have the following important questions to keep in mind: * What is a fair treatment all involved parties that do great work? * What is the best for openSUSE? What will help openSUSE grow?
Preamble
There are many decisions that a Linux distribution does for its users, e.g. packages installed by default and version of packages, and also which of these decisions can be changed by the user or where the distribution limits the user or makes it difficult for the user to decide. openSUSE's installation tries to ask the user as little as possible and uses good heuristics e.g. on how to partition a system. It also comes with an automatic configuration which sets up the system in a default way. Nevertheless a couple of questions are asked during installation - and some of these are considered difficult questions for a user.
The decision about e.g. default editor (emacs, vi, joe,...) or default filesystem are decisions that the distribution does on behalf of the user - even while most users have a preference here. Users expect from a distribution to adjust their system, e.g. change the default editor, in an easy way.
The success of a distribution depends on both how it serves the needs of its current users but also on how it addresses new Linux users.
While there is friendly competition between different desktops, the real competition is between Open Source desktop environment and closed source ones - and therefore the question of default desktop should be considered on what's best for new Linux users.
Many think that openSUSE should decide for new users on a default desktop - and on the other hand make it easy for users to choose a different one or install additional ones.
A decision on the desktop question has to look not only on which desktop is the default but also what this means for this desktop and the other desktops. The Desktop Policy gives such a framework.
Making one default the desktop will not change the way that Novell sponsors the openSUSE community project. There have been comments that making a decision for a default will help both the GNOME and KDE development teams to give users a better desktop experience. I'm inviting those to stand up to their comments and really help out - openSUSE as a community distribution will only get a desktop that is as good as the development community will make it.
Desktop Policy
0. The following text uses GNOME and KDE in alphabetical order. These rules apply to development of openSUSE only, not for any other Novell products.
1. Both GNOME and KDE are first class desktops in openSUSE: neither is technically superior to the other. openSUSE should be known as the distribution with the best GNOME desktop and the best KDE desktop!
2. We make it easy to choose between these two desktops during installation, install both of them - or install others as well.
3. On the relevant screen during installation the most popular desktop is preselected, the desktops are listed in alphabetical order.
4. This screen will explain that both GNOME and KDE are first class desktops and the default is based on popularity.
5. Let's sit together at the openSUSE conference and decide what both GNOME and KDE beeing first-class desktops signifies and how all desktop development teams can work together.
Andreas