On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 7:25 PM, Will Stephenson
The two main desktops both have their place since they handle many things differently,
On Wednesday 04 August 2010 15:34:12 Andreas Jaeger wrote: the different philosophies behind them help to bring both
forward (competition is good!). I agree that much more could be done in working together with common infrastructure - e.g. like both Akanodi and Evolution developed in the last 12 months their own new IMAP libraries
;-(.
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15711 was the Akonadi project's request 2 years ago to host itself at freedesktop.org, as a first step to becoming a shared standard. It was stonewalled until the team gave up in disgust and was closed WONTFIX with some spurious justifications. After a while you just give up and take your toys home. Unilaterally occupying the freedesktop.org namespace seems to be a privilege reserved for GNOME projects.
Also, I've heard last year that changing the installation to make KDE the default installed desktop would bring us so many KDE developers that help to polish the openSUSE KDE desktop. I'm not seeing that many new faces
I have 2 responses to that. One is that you're probably not looking in the right place. I grant you that the direct participation of upstream KDE developers in the openSUSE project has been limited. However, openSUSE has become much more popular within the KDE developers which is indirectly increasing the quality of our desktop. This strategy has been highly successful in increasing the popularity of openSUSE among KDE /users/ and has decreased prejudice against openSUSE.
Secondly, the implementation and communication of 'default desktop selection' was as weak as humany possible (GNOME still first in the list, Zonker and news.o.o backpedalling while making the announcement) to minimise the hurt to our GNOME community while still respecting the strong demand expressed in the FATE feature. We executed this feature in such a half-hearted way, it's no surprise that it weakened the attraction of the *project* to those the selection was intended to appeal to.
I have no idea about freedesktop politics. So I will stay away from it and will believe in your words. However, commenting about Zonker is something I strongly differ. I see the decision to make KDE-Default as just of Michael Loeffler's and not community's. At that time, There was too much argument going on in openSUSE project with no conclusion. So to keep things quiet, Michael Loeffler made a decision (after discussing with the board as he claims), which he believed made sense as per the rules of democracy. It was never a community's decision. Even the oS-GNOME core team wont accept it is the right decision (OTOH, A Diversified community can never make a mutually agreeable decision on competing matters - Sankar's law #1983) I dont think anyone, even oS-board members, will agree that "kde-default" is fair for GNOME. Any extreme-marketing for this decision, if done by Zonker, would've put him in trouble with the GNOME community as it was not a community's decision. Given the perennial disease of openSUSE (desktop-wars), I believe Zonker did a stellar job without taking sides ever and staying neutral. The impact of "KDE-default" decision by itself should have been enough to steal-hearts from the KDE upstream. If any viral marketing spree was needed beyond that, it should have been done by the openSUSE-KDE community and not by Zonker. All the people who happily up-voted in FATE, argued passionately in oS-project, should've written blog post(s) or mails and put it in KDE planet and marketing lists. If kde-default decision has failed to steal-hearts, it is either oS-KDE community's marketing failure or the kde upstream is really not bothered about openSUSE. It is unfair to cite Zonker's marketing commitment as a reason. -- Sankar P http://psankar.blogspot.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org