<div dir="ltr">Hi<br><div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Rex Dieter <span dir="ltr"></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
The KDE SIG would like public comment and feedback on a new Fedora.next<br>
product proposal:<br>
<a href="https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Plasma_Product" target="_blank">https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Plasma_Product</a><br>
<br>
mostly on the base proposal, Governance and PRD bits. Other stuff like<br>
Technical spec are still undergoing polish.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>My understanding is that KDE SIG has the impression that "products" are the new fashionable thing and being a Spin is just not good enough and also the understanding that if KDE Spin is just renamed to KDE Product, it would get rejected. The Plasma product seems to be more or less a rename with some other things thrown in (Scientific because scientific spin happened to use KDE) to make it pass through the board/FESCo approvals. <br>
<br></div><div>My concern is that if this is approved, we are heading towards the world where we have reinvented spins but with a new name without changing anything fundamental about how Fedora releases are structured. If Plasma product is really aimed at a different audience, it needs to be a lot more targeted. If KDE really is better suitable for the target audience (I honestly don't know), then I would like to see that explained further in the proposal. <br>
<br></div><div>Rahul<br></div></div></div></div></div>