[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: kde-community
Subject: Re: [kde-community] Updating our vision
From: Jos Poortvliet <jospoortvliet () gmail ! com>
Date: 2014-01-29 23:06:11
Message-ID: CAABAGrXaZB4Hbig5-SisXKq+7sz5JxG0V2wzpyfwNS8JYBsTdQ () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]
FWIW, i agree with Thomas. Vision discussions often result in long debates
and little outcome. Our manifesto probably being a positive exception due
to a clear ad limited scope and the leadership of who managed it.
I suggest to have and discuss shared ideas in specific areas but refrain
from trying to come with an over-arching and likely over-reaching vision.
sent from my tablet, pls excuse me for brevity and bad spelling
On Jan 29, 2014 9:28 AM, "Thomas Zander" <zander@kde.org> wrote:
> On Tuesday 28 January 2014 21.39.14 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> > when Heiko and me wrote our Human Interface Guideline for product
> > Visions, we wanted to link to the overall KDE Vision. However, when we
> > looked it up at
> > http://techbase.kde.org/Projects/Usability/Principles/KDE4_Vision we
> > noticed that it is for KDE4 and we haven't found a vision document for
> > the next generation of our products yet. I think the majority of
> > content from the KDE4 vision will still be relevant for the next
> > generation, but we might want to update some parts of it as well.
>
> That page said "accessed 500 times", for a document written in 2008, I'd
> say its not been read that often.
>
> A vision makes sense for a big company, to keep everyone towing the party-
> line and avoid people misunderstanding where the leaders are going.
> Its part of the ongoing communication from leaders to underlings.
>
> In open source, Its tricky. Any vision for something like KDE will be made
> up and not really be carried by the majority of the leaders, since everyone
> contributing to open source is a leader.
>
> It would make sense to for induvidual projects, any project where they can
> agree on a vision, like in Krita, it will make a powerful communication
> tool to future contributors.
>
> In short; a vision is useful in itself, but for something as big as KDE, I
> believe its not useful due to the vision itself not being representative.
> --
> Thomas Zander
> _______________________________________________
> kde-community mailing list
> kde-community@kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
>
[Attachment #5 (text/html)]
<p dir="ltr">FWIW, i agree with Thomas. Vision discussions often result in long \
debates and little outcome. Our manifesto probably being a positive exception due to \
a clear ad limited scope and the leadership of who managed it.</p>
<p dir="ltr">I suggest to have and discuss shared ideas in specific areas but refrain \
from trying to come with an over-arching and likely over-reaching vision.</p> <p \
dir="ltr">sent from my tablet, pls excuse me for brevity and bad spelling</p> <div \
class="gmail_quote">On Jan 29, 2014 9:28 AM, "Thomas Zander" <<a \
href="mailto:zander@kde.org">zander@kde.org</a>> wrote:<br \
type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 \
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> On Tuesday 28 January 2014 \
21.39.14 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:<br> > when Heiko and me wrote our Human Interface \
Guideline for product<br> > Visions, we wanted to link to the overall KDE \
Vision. However, when we<br> > looked it up at<br>
> <a href="http://techbase.kde.org/Projects/Usability/Principles/KDE4_Vision" \
target="_blank">http://techbase.kde.org/Projects/Usability/Principles/KDE4_Vision</a> \
we<br> > noticed that it is for KDE4 and we haven't found a vision document \
for<br> > the next generation of our products yet. I think the majority of<br>
> content from the KDE4 vision will still be relevant for the next<br>
> generation, but we might want to update some parts of it as well.<br>
<br>
That page said "accessed 500 times", for a document written in 2008, \
I'd<br> say its not been read that often.<br>
<br>
A vision makes sense for a big company, to keep everyone towing the party-<br>
line and avoid people misunderstanding where the leaders are going.<br>
Its part of the ongoing communication from leaders to underlings.<br>
<br>
In open source, Its tricky. Any vision for something like KDE will be made<br>
up and not really be carried by the majority of the leaders, since everyone<br>
contributing to open source is a leader.<br>
<br>
It would make sense to for induvidual projects, any project where they can<br>
agree on a vision, like in Krita, it will make a powerful communication<br>
tool to future contributors.<br>
<br>
In short; a vision is useful in itself, but for something as big as KDE, I<br>
believe its not useful due to the vision itself not being representative.<br>
--<br>
Thomas Zander<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
kde-community mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:kde-community@kde.org">kde-community@kde.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community" \
target="_blank">https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community</a><br> \
</blockquote></div>
_______________________________________________
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic