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.
Kevin Kofler
