RFC: Minimum requirements for default applications

[Arthur Pemberton]

On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler at chello.at> wrote:
> Rex Dieter wrote:
>> 2.  new/different selection criteria.  for example, it should probably be
>> explicitly mentioned that we would give a slight preference for native
>> qt/kde applications.
>
> As already said very often on IRC, both during and outside meetings, I think
> we should give more than just "a slight preference" for KDE applications,
> particularly for such core desktop/system services such as desktop
> integration for Bluetooth. We are a KDE spin, we should ship KDE
> applications whenever they aren't completely unshippable. They may be
> missing some feature the GNOME alternatives has, but they'll integrate much
> better into our KDE desktop, and for all those core services, upstream is
> actively working on making them better (e.g. KBluetooth has a new, very
> active maintainer now). And of course they have bugs, but so do the GNOME
> alternatives.
>
> Using a GNOME app is acceptable as a temporary workaround when there is
> really no KDE one we can ship instead, but not as a long-term solution.
>
> Pretty much all the minimum requirements listed on that wiki page are far
> beyond the minimum level of service required for the app to be shippable.


Bugs are one thing, what about entirely missing features? To take your
example of bluetooth; audio support it (or at least was) noticeably
missing from KBluettooth, while the Gtk (or was it Gnome) equivalent
is full featured.


-- 
Fedora 11
(www.pembo13.com)