Change Details

*Notice: My English is not good... =Motivation= KDE is a great project. In recent years, KDE software has evolved to become a real alternative to proprietary software thanks to the Plasma environment and many of its main applications (Okular, Krita, Kdenlive, etc.). However, the efforts of the community are very dispersed (in terms of time and focus) and, therefore, a common user does not even know the full potential of KDE. There are too many distros with KDE, but each one pursues different interests and objectives that do not have to coincide with those of the community. In order for KDE to continue to evolve, it has to attract more members (developers and users), and this is achieved through a polished experience that facilitates the transition and adoption of its technologies. To achieve it, KDE developers should focus their efforts to ensure the functionality and triage of their software on a same platform. Think of the motto: **first us, then the rest**. Nate Graham, who I admire, presented the goal of professionalizing KDE. I, in the same direction, would like to point out **some ideas to transform KDE NEON into main center of KDE software** to users and developers. Pros: - Homogeneity: If KDE NEON is officially the KDE distro, the community and their developers are compelled to try their software on the same distro, arrange release schedules and to set a common guidelines (UI/UX). - Integration: If KDE NEON is officially the KDE distro, KDE developers can vote and decide about features and priorities for one common OS. - Continuity: If KDE NEON is officially the KDE distro, the community and their developers can better observe what the needs and shortcomings of the platform/users are. In short, the KDE community can focus their efforts on what matters. - Independence: If KDE NEON is officially the KDE distro, developers and users are kept away from bugs, diverse problems and politics of different companies and organizations. =Plan= 1) **Introduce KDE NEON as first-class distro**: KDE developers should treat KDE NEON as their main distro/OS for creating and debugging and introduce it to users as a platform to access the latest and greatest of the community. Don't fear criticisms. 2) **Define short term goals objectives for KDE NEON**: KDE developers should concrete some ways to show and "fidelice" users and developers. For example, KDE NEON could show a "start window" with simple instructions, links and recommended apps (like Open SUSE does), and offer a simpler way to do simple things (eg. formatting a USB with right-click from Dolphin, or adding a trash bin icon on desktop). 3) **Learn from propietary systems**: It sounds ugly, but we can learn a lot from Windows or MAC in the way that they resolve complex problems by integrating and centralizing resurces. In GNU/Linux there are a lot of fragmentation regarding to packages. KDE NEON could focus on a type of package without limiting users. In my personal (and unprofessional) opinion, setting Appimage as the universal method to install apps on their own folder (MAC style) or setting KDE NEON as an inmutable system (like Fedora Kinoite) could be debatable options in the future in order to standardize, reduce errors and ensure users know what they are doing. =Community= Considering the details exposed by other members (funds, scope, limited resurces, etc.), I think that the KDE community and users could support any radical change if it is logical and well planned. KDE developers could (or should) hear users' opinions with moderation, avoiding to waste time with insignificant things and volatile wishes. =Risks and needs= Priorizing and restructuring KDE NEON does not mean to add more fragmentation or to impose a way to do something. I don't want this goal to be interpreted as something authoritarian, but as a proposal to guide the community efforts into a more helpful direction. I'm sure that you, KDE developers and other profesionals, will do a great job. =Champion= My name is Adrián López Galera. I'm a biologist and Spanish writer. Nowadays, I'm studying software development at my 30s. I'm the author of "[[ https://derechosanimalesya.org/ | ¡Derechos Animales ya! ]]" (Animal Rights now!), a personal website dedicated to promoting veganism and the ethical basis of Animal Rights. I give talks in libraries, universities and other public spaces. I would like, some day, be able to get involved in the KDE development. However, I do not currently have the necessary skills to do so. Regards! =Interest=

*Notice: My English is not good... =Motivation= KDE is a great project. In recent years, KDE software has evolved to become a real alternative to proprietary software thanks to the Plasma environment and many of its main applications (Okular, Krita, Kdenlive, etc.). However, the community efforts are very dispersed (in terms of time and focus) and, therefore, a common user does not even know the full potential of KDE. There are too many distros with KDE, but each one pursues different interests and objectives that do not have to coincide with those of the community. In order for KDE to continue to evolve, it has to attract more members (developers and users), and this is achieved through a polished experience that facilitates the transition and adoption of its technologies. To achieve it, KDE developers should focus their efforts to ensure the functionality and triage of their software on a same platform. Think of the motto: **first us, then the rest**. Nate Graham, who I admire, presented the goal of professionalizing KDE. I, in the same direction, would like to point out **some ideas to transform KDE NEON into main center of KDE software** to users and developers. Pros: - Homogeneity: If KDE NEON is officially the KDE distro, the community and their developers are compelled to try their software on the same distro, arrange release schedules and to set a common guidelines (UI/UX). - Integration: If KDE NEON is officially the KDE distro, KDE developers can vote and decide about features and priorities for one common OS. - Continuity: If KDE NEON is officially the KDE distro, the community and their developers can better observe what the needs and shortcomings of the platform/users are. In short, the KDE community can focus their efforts on what matters. - Independence: If KDE NEON is officially the KDE distro, developers and users are kept away from bugs, diverse problems and politics of different companies and organizations. =Plan= 1) **Introduce KDE NEON as first-class distro**: KDE developers should treat KDE NEON as their main distro/OS for creating and debugging and introduce it to users as a platform to access the latest and greatest of the community. Don't fear criticisms. 2) **Define short term goals objectives for KDE NEON**: KDE developers should concrete some ways to show and "fidelice" users and developers. For example, KDE NEON could show a "start window" with simple instructions, links and recommended apps (like Open SUSE does), and offer a simpler way to do simple things (eg. formatting a USB with right-click from Dolphin, or adding a trash bin icon on desktop). 3) **Learn from propietary systems**: It sounds ugly, but we can learn a lot from Windows or MAC in the way that they resolve complex problems by integrating and centralizing resurces. In GNU/Linux there are a lot of fragmentation regarding to packages. KDE NEON could focus on a type of package without limiting users. In my personal (and unprofessional) opinion, setting Appimage as the universal method to install apps on their own folder (MAC style) or setting KDE NEON as an inmutable system (like Fedora Kinoite) could be debatable options in the future in order to standardize, reduce errors and ensure users know what they are doing. =Community= Considering the details exposed by other members (funds, scope, limited resurces, etc.), I think that the KDE community and users could support any radical change if it is logical and well planned. KDE developers could (or should) hear users' opinions with moderation, avoiding to waste time with insignificant things and volatile wishes. =Risks and needs= Priorizing and restructuring KDE NEON does not mean to add more fragmentation or to impose a way to do something. I don't want this goal to be interpreted as something authoritarian, but as a proposal to guide the community efforts into a more helpful direction. I'm sure that you, KDE developers and other profesionals, will do a great job. =Champion= My name is Adrián López Galera. I'm a biologist and Spanish writer. Nowadays, I'm studying software development at my 30s. I'm the author of "[[ https://derechosanimalesya.org/ | ¡Derechos Animales ya! ]]" (Animal Rights now!), a personal website dedicated to promoting veganism and the ethical basis of Animal Rights. I give talks in libraries, universities and other public spaces. I would like, some day, be able to get involved in the KDE development. However, I do not currently have the necessary skills to do so. Regards! =Interest=

*Notice: My English is not good... =Motivation= KDE is a great project. In recent years, KDE software has evolved to become a real alternative to proprietary software thanks to the Plasma environment and many of its main applications (Okular, Krita, Kdenlive, etc.). However, the efforts of the communitycommunity efforts are very dispersed (in terms of time and focus) and, therefore, a common user does not even know the full potential of KDE. There are too many distros with KDE, but each one pursues different interests and objectives that do not have to coincide with those of the community. In order for KDE to continue to evolve, it has to attract more members (developers and users), and this is achieved through a polished experience that facilitates the transition and adoption of its technologies. To achieve it, KDE developers should focus their efforts to ensure the functionality and triage of their software on a same platform. Think of the motto: **first us, then the rest**. Nate Graham, who I admire, presented the goal of professionalizing KDE. I, in the same direction, would like to point out **some ideas to transform KDE NEON into main center of KDE software** to users and developers. Pros: - Homogeneity: If KDE NEON is officially the KDE distro, the community and their developers are compelled to try their software on the same distro, arrange release schedules and to set a common guidelines (UI/UX). - Integration: If KDE NEON is officially the KDE distro, KDE developers can vote and decide about features and priorities for one common OS. - Continuity: If KDE NEON is officially the KDE distro, the community and their developers can better observe what the needs and shortcomings of the platform/users are. In short, the KDE community can focus their efforts on what matters. - Independence: If KDE NEON is officially the KDE distro, developers and users are kept away from bugs, diverse problems and politics of different companies and organizations. =Plan= 1) **Introduce KDE NEON as first-class distro**: KDE developers should treat KDE NEON as their main distro/OS for creating and debugging and introduce it to users as a platform to access the latest and greatest of the community. Don't fear criticisms. 2) **Define short term goals objectives for KDE NEON**: KDE developers should concrete some ways to show and "fidelice" users and developers. For example, KDE NEON could show a "start window" with simple instructions, links and recommended apps (like Open SUSE does), and offer a simpler way to do simple things (eg. formatting a USB with right-click from Dolphin, or adding a trash bin icon on desktop). 3) **Learn from propietary systems**: It sounds ugly, but we can learn a lot from Windows or MAC in the way that they resolve complex problems by integrating and centralizing resurces. In GNU/Linux there are a lot of fragmentation regarding to packages. KDE NEON could focus on a type of package without limiting users. In my personal (and unprofessional) opinion, setting Appimage as the universal method to install apps on their own folder (MAC style) or setting KDE NEON as an inmutable system (like Fedora Kinoite) could be debatable options in the future in order to standardize, reduce errors and ensure users know what they are doing. =Community= Considering the details exposed by other members (funds, scope, limited resurces, etc.), I think that the KDE community and users could support any radical change if it is logical and well planned. KDE developers could (or should) hear users' opinions with moderation, avoiding to waste time with insignificant things and volatile wishes. =Risks and needs= Priorizing and restructuring KDE NEON does not mean to add more fragmentation or to impose a way to do something. I don't want this goal to be interpreted as something authoritarian, but as a proposal to guide the community efforts into a more helpful direction. I'm sure that you, KDE developers and other profesionals, will do a great job. =Champion= My name is Adrián López Galera. I'm a biologist and Spanish writer. Nowadays, I'm studying software development at my 30s. I'm the author of "[[ https://derechosanimalesya.org/ | ¡Derechos Animales ya! ]]" (Animal Rights now!), a personal website dedicated to promoting veganism and the ethical basis of Animal Rights. I give talks in libraries, universities and other public spaces. I would like, some day, be able to get involved in the KDE development. However, I do not currently have the necessary skills to do so. Regards! =Interest=