From kde-promo Tue Feb 18 19:58:22 2014 From: Jos Poortvliet Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 19:58:22 +0000 To: kde-promo Subject: Re: [kde-promo] Article about Baloo Message-Id: <2254846.joYyDVd3Kc () linux-606j> X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-promo&m=139275350230886 MIME-Version: 1 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--===============5717701343656727555==" --===============5717701343656727555== Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart26788566.xLHdarvRUN"; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" --nextPart26788566.xLHdarvRUN Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" On Tuesday 18 February 2014 15:15:19 Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 14:54:04 you wrote: > > On Tuesday 18 February 2014 14:30:13 Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > > I'm about half-way there with you. I agree with the principle, but = as > > with > > artwork (where developers still have plenty of say) I think this sh= ould > > be > > in both hands at once. >=20 > I agree. With artwork, it is usually a consultation type relationship= . The > artist works with the developers, but retains direction and decision > making. > > Which puts (as you rightly do) the blame as much on us as anyone - = we > > should step up more, as marketing/promo people, when it comes to > > branding. > More than just =E2=80=9Cstepping up=E2=80=9D, a mandate from the deve= lopment community to > manage these things is needed, and a group needs to take on that comm= itment > and execute over the long term. =E2=80=9CStepping up=E2=80=9D is not = going to produce > consistent results, as seen in this case. >=20 > > So yes, perhaps we should have said to Vishesh that Baloo is not a > > perfect > > name. >=20 > I did, and explained why, on a public mailing list. That was ignored.= > Perhaps I=E2=80=99m not part of the =E2=80=9Cwe=E2=80=9D around these= parts anymore, but it was > pointed out. I see below that you mean you said you disagreed with changing the name= in=20 the first place. That was NOT ignored, at least - I think we discussed = it and=20 it seemed consensus was that it is not such a bad thing to do. At least= I=20 know I took your opinion under consideration and was happy you provided= that=20 reasoning. And I think that it had merrit - just, for me, not enough fo= r a=20 big fight. I think, renaming or not, it doesn't matter that much. And I'm saying this not to slap you or anything, just to counter your=20= "perhaps I'm not part of the "we" around these parts anymore". As far a= s I am=20 concerned, you VERY MUCH are. > Developer have the understanding that branding is ultimately a decis= ion > made at their sole discretion, even when it impacts others. >=20 > > Meanwhile, I didn't think of anything horrible and still don't feel= it is > > that bad *and* it seems nobody has hammered on this point yet - I s= uggest > > we stick with it. >=20 > The name itself is not objectively bad, and that has never been the i= ssue. > The issue is *changing* a name that already exists and for which quit= e a > bit of effort has been put into. It exists on wikis such as Userbase = and > Techbase, in configuration UI (though that has been pushed back to a > minimum, more or less), etc. The lack of continuity not only throws > confusion into the air, it removes what is probably the most obvious = and > easiest public communications path: =E2=80=9Cversion 2 addresses the = prior > version=E2=80=99s challenges while retaining its benefits=E2=80=9D. N= ow there is the more > complex task of explaining what Baloo does, what it does differently = from > Nepomuk, why this necessitated such a big change ... iow we=E2=80=99r= e going to be > faced with discussion revolving around > implementation details rather than being able to focus purely of user= > benefit stories. Yes, I'm aware. As I've said before - you're right. At the same time, t= he=20 name Nepomuk is so poisoned for many, I'm not sure a V2 would get a cha= nce to=20 convince many. > > Besides, in our communication we should indeed call it > > 'search' or 'semantic search' and nothing else anyway. >=20 > Agreed ... which is also why introducing a new name publicly is not a= great > idea: it makes accomplishing this more difficult. Fair. --nextPart26788566.xLHdarvRUN Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAlMDvH4ACgkQ+wgQ1AD35iwxXgCfQ4YplrlEgTtdkmTS9JayGKU1 qcEAniGTifeSlWBR7OIv5dCytaiMYaXN =axmE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart26788566.xLHdarvRUN-- --===============5717701343656727555== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ 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. --===============5717701343656727555==--