DE discussion summary

Alex GS alxgrtnstrngl at gmail.com
Tue Feb 11 00:17:37 UTC 2014


Before everyone jumps to conclusions I think a big step is being skipped
and overlooked.  One of the biggest problems is that Linux desktop projects
make preference oriented decisions like choosing blue because they find it
pleasing over orange or whatever, purely qualitative.  Or then it's the
social factor, because we don't want to upset our friends by choosing
another project or system.  This has to stop, qualitative and
political/social reasoning is not going to get a result that has any real
meaning in the real world.

You need to consult statistics, conduct exhaustive user-surveys and make a
data driven decision.  I was shocked that despite the fact that this
mailing-list is loaded to the brim with engineers I was the only one who
ever quoted any precise statistics. Those statistics showed a desktop
marketplace that's not aligned at all with the default desktop being
discussed here.

Can you please present your case using actual statistics and analysis so we
know it's a sound decision?











On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 6:33 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam at redhat.com>wrote:

> On Mon, 2014-02-10 at 21:26 +0100, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 12:29:25PM +0100, Lukáš Tinkl wrote:
> > > Dne 10.2.2014 12:09, Richard Hughes napsal(a):
> > > >On 10 February 2014 10:02, Colin Walters <walters at verbum.org> wrote:
> > > >>I find the idea that the long and historic relationship between
> GNOME and
> > > >>Fedora could turn around so quickly like that to be very strange
> > > >
> > > >The fact we're even considering asking the question "which DE do we
> > > >want to use for workstation" is just crazy. I think we're kidding
> > > >ourselves if we want to try and answer that question honestly when the
> > > >biggest backer of the project by several orders of magnitude has
> > > >several hundred engineers working full time on GNOME and lower parts
> > >
> > > I think you've made a typo here (hundreds???)
> >
> > This is not a typo.  If you consider not just GNOME but the lower
> > parts of the stack on which GNOME relies (as Colin wrote), it is
> > actually hundreds.  Of course, some of those lower parts of the stack
> > are likely shared by many DEs, in varying amounts, but it's still
> > accurate.
>
> It's clearly *not* accurate, though, to use the 'desktop plus underlying
> stack' number for GNOME, but only the 'desktop' number for the other
> desktops. That's obviously an unviable comparison.
>
> It's either say, what, about a dozen(?) vs. two or three if you just
> consider those working actually on the desktop, or "a dozen" plus
> "hundreds" vs. "two or three" plus "hundreds". You can't get away with
> comparing "a dozen" plus "hundreds" against "two or three", as Richard's
> mail did:
>
> "the biggest backer of the project by several orders of magnitude has
> several hundred engineers working full time on GNOME and lower parts
> of the stack that GNOME uses. If I remember correctly, we have about
> two employees on all of KDE, and one on XFCE. None on LXDE. None on
> MATE."
> --
> Adam Williamson
> Fedora QA Community Monkey
> IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
> http://www.happyassassin.net
>
> --
> desktop mailing list
> desktop at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/desktop/attachments/20140210/e5e66b12/attachment.html>


More information about the desktop mailing list