Fedora Plasma Product, feedback please

[inode0]

On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 12:10 PM, Rex Dieter <rdieter at math.unl.edu> wrote:
> The KDE SIG would like public comment and feedback on a new Fedora.next
> product proposal:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Plasma_Product
>
> mostly on the base proposal, Governance and PRD bits.  Other stuff like
> Technical spec are still undergoing polish.

I went from pretty excited initially to a bit disappointed that the
PRD seems to mostly be snipped from the Workstation PRD. I was hoping
for something with a more original vision I guess. So my first comment
really is meant to encourage the Fedora Plasma Product to create more
separation between itself and the Workstation Product. Two products
with a very similar vision I suspect will be a hard sell generally.

Two of the statements in the Workstation PRD that I objected to I see
again in the Plasma PRD.

The section Packaging for Fedora Plasma ends with the sentence, "No
software will be blocked from being packaged as long as it doesn't
break any part of the core desktop system upon install." The word
"packaged" here is pretty loaded and suggests we are going beyond just
saying that the offensive package will be excluded from the Plasma
product. Would "No software will be blocked from being available to a
Plasma installation as long as it doesn't break any part of the core
desktop system upon install," mean the same thing to you? Or maybe
that sentence could just be dropped entirely. We welcome all sorts of
additional software ... with no mention of some nebulous large hammer
that will fall on software deemed offensive to some other unspecified
set of software?

The section Other tasks for working group concludes with "The working
group will also regularly meet with a designated representative of Red
Hat to discuss how Red Hats product and development plans will affect
the Fedora product development and resource allocation." This still
raises questions. Who is designating the representative of Red Hat?
Common sense says it would be a person designated by Red Hat to
discuss these things with the working group but that wasn't what I was
told when it came to the Workstation PRD. So what does this mean in
the Plasma PRD. In both cases, although more so in this case, it just
seems odd to make a statement like this limited to a representative of
Red Hat. Can't it simply be generalized to express your interest in
collaborating closely with other strategic partners?

John