Summary of the fdo disussion at GCDS

[Cornelius Schumacher]

On Friday 10 July 2009 00:10:55 Jannis Pohlmann wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Jul 2009 09:58:43 +0200
> Cornelius Schumacher <schumacher at kde.org> wrote:
> >
> > That said, it doesn't mean at all that only specs relevant to GNOME
> > or KDE should be fd.o specs. Other communities obviously also have to
> > be involved and have the same rights to propose and implement specs.
> > It's really only about a well-defined, simple, and transparent
> > mechanism to grant fd.o acceptance.
>
> Well, you have an ambiguity there. Simply saying "specs require to be
> accepted by both, GNOME and KDE" on the one hand and "sometimes, specs
> can also be accepted even if they are not accepted by GNOME and KDE" is
> not going to work.

That's not what I wanted to say. I wanted to say that GNOME and KDE should 
also accept specs, which are not directly relevant to them, but which are 
worked on by other communities. So the criteria would be simple and 
unambiguous. It certainly would require some common sense and the will to 
collaborate, but I would consider that as a given, as freedesktop.org won't 
work without that anyway.

> That being said, I kinda like Jakob's suggestion to give 2 points
> to GNOME and KDE each, and 1 point to Xfce, LXDE, Enlightenment and
> other desktops/projects and grant specs the fd.o status once they reach
> 4 points. I don't know if it's perfect or even good enough but at least
> it's very simple and well-defined ;)

The problem I see there is how to define who gets how many points. I could 
easily start yet another desktop project and demand to get some points for 
fd.o. How would the criteria be?

I do believe that the smaller desktop projects should be involved in the 
specification process, but the practical problems of modeling a formal voting 
process including all possible projects, seem to be too hard to solve at the 
current stage for me.

-- 
Cornelius Schumacher <schumacher at kde.org>