-1 to reverting

Back when Kubuntu started, one of its goals was to provide a good KDE/Plasma experience on top of Ubuntu tech. This is hard because instead of doing small packaging tweaks one has to collaborate with other people in Plasma and KDE to get things right. It has a big advantage though. We all advance together.

I personally couldn't care less about what Kubuntu looks like by default, but I like that when I suggest a distro to somebody, it contains the decisions gathered by the KDE Community contributors as whole.

Such menial divergences hurt us all: it doesn't really put anything on the table, but developers lose focus on where to contribute and it creates small divergence within the ecosystem where it doesn't matter.

Please, if you think Plasma default color scheme could be better, please join the KDE Visual Design Group and Plasma.
If you want your users to be able to easily have a darker UX, help us make it available easily from the installer or otherwise without undermining Plasma's carefully selected defaults.

for me as well, this kinds of tweaks make really difficult for me to recommend kubuntu anymore.
what goes in our defaults goes trough a lot of work and lots of discussion, even minor changes makes our work between the developers and the VDG... moot

I originally suggested this change to Kubuntu and I would also suggest this to KDE and VDG.

Plasma's default is to display a panel at all times and for it to be bright. In my opinion, this is an unfortunate default and all of Plasma should switch to the hybrid approach that Kubuntu beta currently has.

Reasons Why Hybrid is Better:

1. Panels are always visible in Plasma by default. The dark panel is better to the eye if set to always visible.
   • If a user has a bright window theme and all windows adhere to it then not so bad. However, many applications don't adhere to that. Text Editors are a good example of being dark by default.
   • A bright panel is very jarring with dark windows. A dark panel would not be jarring regardless because it doesn't pull focus from any window theme.
2. Dark panels/menus are friendly to the eye because they are suppose to be helpful when needed but not intended to be the main focus of computing. Bright panels pull focus for seemingly no reason.
3. Hybrid approach is the most common approach and thus on-boarding of new users would be smoother.
   • Windows, GNOME, Cinnamon, MATE, Unity (I know but still relevant in this discussion), and many more use a hybrid approach for defaults.

My Counter-points to Hybrid Counter-points:

1. "macOS uses a light panel design"
   • macOS has theming guidelines that most applications adhere to, not much an issue for them.
   • Apple hardware has a bright aesthetic. A bright panel next to hardware that is also bright isn't as jarring because the contrast is minimal.
     • 90%+ of PC hardware has a dark, even black, aesthetic so the bright panel of Plasma can be very jarring.
     • Dark panel is not even jarring on bright aesthetic hardware so there isn't a negative with hardware that isn't a part of the 90%+.
2. "This is not how KDE/Plasma does it officially".
   • If everyone just stuck with defaults for everything then innovation wouldn't exist.

This is hard because instead of doing small packaging tweaks one has to collaborate with other people in Plasma and KDE to get things right. It has a big advantage though. We all advance together.

Distros should be encouraged to make changes to see what the users think. Kubuntu doing this also helps Plasma because it will be a dataset of what users think of the decision vs Plasma's default. If testing isn't done to find out what users think then reverse of your point is also true, "we all stagnate together". What testing was done by the VDG or Plasma in general to find out what users think of this approach? Based on my research, the answer to that question is null.

it contains the decisions gathered by the KDE Community contributors as whole.

I am a very big fan of KDE and I am quite vocal about that. However, not everything KDE does, as a whole, is a good decision.

Such menial divergences hurt us all: it doesn't really put anything on the table, but developers lose focus on where to contribute and it creates small divergence within the ecosystem where it doesn't matter.

If it is menial and doesn't matter then that should be all the more reason to do it and find out what users think. I don't understand how something deemed as "menial" can also be hurtful.

Please, if you think Plasma default color scheme could be better, please join the KDE Visual Design Group and Plasma.

I have made suggestions throughout KDE for years, in most cases I am asked to provide data as to why it should be done. However, in some cases, there hasn't been any testing done to provide data and thus status quo is continued.

without undermining Plasma's carefully selected defaults.

I disagree that everything Plasma has as default is "carefully selected". There are many defaults that I researched in the past trying to find out why it was done where the only reason I could find was "let's try it" or "because we have another somewhat related default in something else so why not".

There are also defaults that Plasma has now that were selected in the KDE3 days and defaults from KDE4/Plasma4 days.

+1 for reverting it. Looks terrible. Neon has the best defaults.

+1 for reverting it. Looks terrible. Neon has the best defaults.

I've reconsidered. As long as one has the possibility to use Breeze or Breeze Dark, I don't have a problem with Hybrid. Personally, I don't like Hybrid, but after all the hard work, it should probably be a keeper. The only thing that bugs me is that Hybrid is default. Again, not much of a problem for me. @michaeltunnell Sir, we might disagree on a number of things but at the end of the day, I can only appreciate your involvement. Thank you.

@raddison Breeze and Breeze Dark both have glaring issues making the default of either as a negative. The Hybrid approach addresses the issues of both sides without suffering from the faults of either, that makes the Hybrid design the better option to be default.

Of course, it would be provided for switching to either of the other options since Plasma is heavily focused on customizations but defaults should be focused on what is best for general computing not the preference of individuals. As a UX Designer, this is the basis for all of my suggestions.

As I had said, I don't have a problem with Hybrid. Moreover, I don't have a problem with it, even if it's default :)

Plasma is intended to be downstream-customizable. This intent is visible in the numerous APIs it exposes for this purpose (from LnF packages to various other forms of theming files). It's inherent in its modular design, even. Telling a downstream that exercises those possibilities that it makes them "hard to recommend" for not sticking to defaults is at best sending very mixed messages, and I think inappropriate.

Personally, I think Kubuntu is in principle making a perfectly valid choice here. The "Hybrid" approach is followed by several successful systems in the market. It was also what KDE 4 opted to do. The recurrence is unsurprising. It's ultimately up to Kubuntu to make this decision and see if they find and audience for it or not.

Any "what you're doing is wrong" debate should focus on:

• The pros and cons of the specific choices made vis-a-vis their intended audience

This should be discussed in the context of Kubuntu, the relationship between KDE.org and Kubuntu is immaterial to it.

"You might be interested: We have experience trying this and it doesn't work, because ..." is a very different way of providing feedback than "you're being bad for using APIs we put there to do something different from what we do".

• If the choices made are the best way to address the problem that motivated them

"Is there a better way to do it upstream" can be part of that.

Are we thinking that we want to change our Plasma defaults to fit a theme more like the one in Kubuntu? Is that what this conversation is about?

I think this Phab task is entirely about the downstream Kubuntu change.

In T8450#137045, @apol wrote:

Please, if you think Plasma default color scheme could be better, please join the KDE Visual Design Group and Plasma.

IMHO It would make sense for all major Plasma distros to have representatives (at least 1) on the VDG. Kind of like acting as a liaison between their respective communities and Plasma upstream. This only makes sense to me.

If you want your users to be able to easily have a darker UX, help us make it available easily from the installer or otherwise without undermining Plasma's carefully selected defaults.

This makes sense. This option should be added to the installer or as a 1st-run script (which has been discussed many times). Not sure how practical the installer option would be, with different distributions using different installers though.

I'm a fan of the current hybrid approach as it looks great to me. A quick scroll through DeviantArt shows dark themes being quite popular: KDE Plasma on DeviantArt

To me, this would seem like the perfect opportunity to really showcase Plasma's look and feel packs. In (my) perfect Plasma world, the user would be shown alternative look and feel packs - like for example the current default hybrid one (no action needed there as it's the default in Kubuntu), a Breeze Dark one, a Breeze Light one, and the MacOS and Win 10 packs. To me look and feel packs are a real showcase for plasma visually that seems to be drastically underused and misunderstood. I do think there may be issues with them not fully working properly and certainly not as easy to create / tweak as they could be, but again that would be a really nice option for our users and showcase the versatility in appearance that could easily be achieved.

I could see a practical installer option that visually gives a preview of the default theme, and a clickable link to other themes with text something like "available alternative themes" that leads to a sub-page showcasing the included alternatives. That way most users will simply click-through and use the default, and it gives the default a slightly more "official" status. But the options are there. Options are good.

Ideally these ideas should all be upsteam, but I see nothing wrong with individual distributions catering to their users or wanting to be unique for branding purposes. Those wanting a "pure" OOTB Plasma experience can always use Neon, as that's kind of what it's there for. Again, just my 2-cents. Sorry for being slightly off-topic if this post comes off that way, I'm just attempting to expanding on some previous feedback.

TL/DR

+1 for the hybrid from me (to stay on topic)

Future considerations beyond 18.04

• Distros should be encouraged to have representation within the VDG
• Ship 4 or 5 quality L&F packs and give an option on 1st run or via the installer for a user to select them if they want, and also be selectable in the Workspace Theme section of settings by default. Again, this has been discussed before and IIRC generally got positive feedback.

In T8450#138012, @James wrote:

In T8450#137045, @apol wrote:

Please, if you think Plasma default color scheme could be better, please join the KDE Visual Design Group and Plasma.

IMHO It would make sense for all major Plasma distros to have representatives (at least 1) on the VDG. Kind of like acting as a liaison between their respective communities and Plasma upstream. This only makes sense to me.

For Kubuntu, that would be me. :)

The installer at least with ubiquity would be very difficult and a waste of time tbh. Joining the VDG is not a bad idea though.