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

List:       kde-promo
Subject:    Re: [kde-promo] What is the goal of dot.kde.org?
From:       Tom Chance <lists () tomchance ! org ! uk>
Date:       2004-11-08 11:09:51
Message-ID: 200411081109.52009.lists () tomchance ! org ! uk
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sunday 07 Nov 2004 18:47, Navindra Umanee wrote:
> Now, assume you had a hard core of volunteers who did whatever the mob
> said.  What kind of product are you going to end up with?  One based
> on the lowest common denominator?  Really, it is not so obvious or
> simple.  If the mob had to decide on CORBA vs DCOP or GVFS vs KIO,
> where would the KDE project end up?
> 
> Is the mob going to be receptive to new, shocking, ideas at first?  I
> would guess not.  And if not, is there really no value in such ideas?
> 
> As far as I know, in most KDE projects, the people who do the work,
> and are qualified to, make the decisions.  If your idea is so obvious
> then maybe all KDE projects should adopt it.

You can't compare the KDE development model with a media outlet in that way. 
When it comes to development, generally speaking the developer who does the 
work decides because there is not right/wrong, only good and better code.

And as Scott has pointed out, where this doesn't apply, where there are 
development issues that are more complex than good or better code, developers 
have to discuss things and try to reach a consensus before making "policy".

And then there are even development decisions where I think it's reasonable to 
take input from the wider KDE community. For the most part this happens 
automatically, through Bugzilla and developers simply being receptive to 
things that people want (e.g. integration issues). I happen to think more 
informal consultation would be good... it's something we tried with the 
Quality Teams but never got off the ground due to lack of volunteers.

Anyway, veering away from this for the moment...


> If they don't want to be here, then obviously they can't or won't make
> even the most basic commitment.

Subscribing to a mailing list is *not* a basic commitment for most people. 
This is something that we *must* come to terms with. Most of the readers of 
the Dot won't make that commitment, and we shouldn't exclude them on this 
basis. Having a "debate" on what the Dot is there for amongst a few people on 
this mailing list does *not* constitute a community decision.

A professional media outlet will combine market research with experienced 
editorial control. The Dot doesn't have these resources, but it is part of a 
community-minded project. So it makes sense, IMO, to find community-oriented 
ways of determining what the readers want.

And veering away one more time...

> The dot is doing alright without interference.  It can however be
> improved.  Politics is not what is going to improve the dot.  What is
> going to improve the dot is more quality content contributed in a
> timely manner.  This means work.  Real work as opposed to posturing.

A media outlet whose editorial policy is bunk won't attract quality content. A 
media outlet whose guiding policies exclude issues that are popular with the 
readership and deemed "on-topic" for the community won't attract writers. A 
media outlet whose content is generally of a low quality won't attract 
quality writers.

Politics *and* real work will determine how good the Dot is.

Anyway, bringing these three threads of thought together, if community 
consultation is something that KDE already does on an ad-hoc basis, and if it 
is something that the Dot ought to do both to preserve quality, topicality 
and popularity, then the only reason not to do it is volunteer time.

I can see no reasonable objection to the idea in principle, only that it might 
consume more time than it is worth.

One possible way of doing this would be to post a Dot story simply asking for 
comments on what people want to see it publish. It might turn into a lot of 
noise, but that could then be filtered by people on this list. Or by a 
"working group" of people who try to form some consensus on a wiki page.

And I'm going to stop there. I'm starting to seem like this argument is my 
life ;-) It's not something I'm particularly concerned about... I'm just 
interested in finding ways of opening up the KDE decision making process to 
the community.

Regards,
Tom
 
_______________________________________________
This message is from the kde-promo mailing list.

Visit https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-promo to unsubscribe, set digest on \
or temporarily stop your subscription.


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