[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-panel-devel
Subject:    Re: naming the next major release
From:       Thomas Pfeiffer <colomar () autistici ! org>
Date:       2013-09-05 11:35:36
Message-ID: 52286C88.4070606 () autistici ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

On 19.08.2013 21:56, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> Hi...
>
> after seeing the Nth time that we don=92t know if the next release will be
> called Plasma Workspaces 2 or something else, i=92d like to find consensu=
s on
> this point so we can move forward in communication with confidence.
>
> the first point that we=92ve all been around a million times, but i will =
cover
> again for completeness:
>
> 	Do we need a single name for all the bits that go into our desktop shell?
>
> yes, we do.
>
> a) the PR reason: it is impossible to communicate clearly about =93those =
20
> things that fit together but which all have different (and kooky) names=
=94 and for
> that reason it is very hard for people to identify with or understand suc=
h a
> product.
>
> b) the developers reason: it allows us to draw a clear line around the
> workspaces (desktop, netbook, active, etc.) and everything else KDE produ=
ces.
> this is key for broader use of our libraries (Frameworks 5) and our
> applications: when people don=92t understand they aren=92t connected to t=
he
> =93desktop platform=94 they don=92t use our libraries or apps if they don=
=92t use our
> desktop environment.
>
> c) the community reason: as has been said a number of times, many of us y=
earn
> for a greater sense of belonging in the workspace efforts. whether that i=
s stuff
> like bluetooth, network integration, desktop wallet, panels, desktop laye=
rs,
> window management .. it all really belongs together in that it is written=
 to
> be used together. to be usable together we need to work together. to work
> together we are helped by having a common identity.
>
> so we need a name we all share. the current working title has been =93Pla=
sma
> Workspaces 2".
>
> there are 3 parts to the PW2 name:
>
> 1. Plasma
> 2. Workspaces
> 3. =912=92
>
> so, one at a time:
>
> 1. Plasma is a brand that has already received a good amount of investmen=
t,
> and we need a distinct nomenclature from =91KDE=92.
>
> we can=92t just use =93Workspace=94 either, with the idea of using =93KDE=
 Workspaces=94
> because then what do we call Desktop vs Netbook vs Tablet? if =93KDEK
> Workspaces=94 were the name, then we=92d end up with KDE Tablet Workspace=
 which
> sounds dreadful and is completely non-descript. KDE Workspace Tablet is
> grammatically awkward to the point of being wrong in English.
>
> 2. =93Workspaces=94gives us a way to umbrella all the Plasma primary UX t=
hat we
> provide (desktop, netbook, mediacenter, tablet, ... whatever comes in fut=
ure).
>
> that said, =93Workspaces=94 is the least meaningful bit of the 3 words. w=
ithout it
> we have just KDE Plasma. the reason we added Workspaces was to differenti=
ate
> between the user products and the underlying technology.  we do, however,
> refer to it as Plasma Desktop (no workspaces in there), Plasma Active, et=
c.
>
> =93Workspaces=94 is also a word that most people do not know / understand=
 until it
> is explained. this contributes to the weakness of this part of the
> nomenclature.
>
> it does allow us to say, however, things like =93KDE Plasma Workspaces in=
cludes
> Plasma Destkop, Plasma Active ..=94 which rolls off the tongue nicely. ho=
wever,
> we could do the same without making Workspaces a proper part of the name =
and
> just use it a regular noun in conjuction with the name =93KDE Plasma=94. =
this
> would result in phrasing like:
>
> 	=93KDE=92s Plasma workspaces come in Desktop, Netbook, Tablet and Mediac=
enter
> flavours...=94
>
> 	=93KDE=92s Plasma provides user experiences for desktop, netbook, tablet=
, ..=94
>
> given that we are moving to a =93grand unified shell=94 approach where th=
e different
> user experiences flow seamlessly from one to the next, it may make sense =
to
> drop the concept that there is such huge differentiation that they are the
> =93Workspaces=94 and instead are just =93Plasma=94 which happens to morph=
 to fit the
> device.

+1 for dropping Workspaces. It sounds way more technical and less cool =

than Plasma.

> 3. =912=92 ... why =93two=94 if this is version 5? well, libplasma is act=
ually going
> to be version 6 iirc, so it isn=92t the library. i also am not a big beli=
ever in
> branding after version numbers. neither are any of our proprietary compet=
itors
> who have a lot more marketing and communications savvy than we tend to. ;)
> what i like about 2 is:
>
> * it communicates this is something after the first. it=92s that whole =
=93two point
> oh=94 thing, though hopefully less hype than, say, =93web 2.0=94 ;)
>
> * it=92s simple and direct
>
> * =912=92 is a couple, and a couple is a nice human idea :) this is borne=
 out by
> the =931, 2, many=94 pattern in many ancient languages. we know 1, we kno=
w 2,
> after that it=92s just an abstract concept.

How about dropping the number altogether? I think we just feel the need =

to add a number to it because it's so much different on a technical =

level. However, I keep reading that the switch between Plasma 4.X and =

the new Plasma is supposed to be hardly even noticeable for the end user.
So why not just calling it "Plasma" and give each version a purely =

technical version number which is not used for marketing purposes? New =

iterations would just be announced as "The next version of Plasma".

If we still feel we need to give it a different name because it's =

technically so new, we could just add something other than a number, =

"Plasma NG" or whatever (marketing people are better at finding cool =

names then I am, for sure). I'd find that less confusing than naming the =

successor to Plasma 4.11 "Plasma 2".

> Sooooooooooo ... here is my proposal:
>
> 	We call it Plasma 2 and use that as a rallying call to
> 	focus on its unified user experience
> 	across the spectrum of devices people use today.
>
> as developers, it will remind us of our goals.
>
> to our users, it will be the symbol of this idea of all these individual
> components that work together beautifully no matter what device you put i=
t on.
>
> yes, this means we drop =93Workspaces=94 as clumsy, hard to understand an=
d no
> longer fully applicable.
>
>
> Other proposals, ideas, tweaks to the above most welcome, but let=92s try=
 to
> come to a consensus on this matter before the end of this month.
>
> then we can all move forward in confidence together, whatever it is we de=
cide.

+1 for settling on a name soon. I don't think Plasma 2 is bad, but as =

stated above, I'd find something number-less even better.

Cheers,
Thomas


_______________________________________________
Plasma-devel mailing list
Plasma-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]