Gerald B. Cox wrote: > Rex requested that I start a separate thread on this if I believed it > warranted further discussion. I believe it does. I believe that the > current voting proposal currently underway for the selection of default > browser does not align with the mission statement of the Fedora KDE SIG. > > Below is the text of my previous message which was attached to the initial > voting results. I understand that some voting has yet to be completed - > but unless I am mistaken this isn't suppose to be a vote about browser > personal preference. It is suppose to be a vote about which browser > aligns with the published mission of the KDE SIG. Since you are reposting your message, I am also going to repost my reply. :-) > Thanks very much Rex for posting this so quickly. I would be interested > in understanding the reason people voted the way they did. The issue IMO > is that normally, when selecting a default you have well defined criteria > for making the decision. This assists in making sure that everyone is on > the same page and is making an objective decision. For example, as I > mentioned before I'm a big proponent of all things Chrome - but even if > the Chromium that exists in the Fedora repository was in a state that > what I would consider stable (it's not, IMO) I would still choose > qupzilla in > this instance. It fits into what I believe would be the mission of the > KDE spin. +1 > Obviously, there is an extreme disconnect between what I believe the > mission to be, and the opinion of others. I believe the lack of clarity > is causing friction. There can be a big difference between personal > preference and adherence to a defined mission. Indeed. I also get the feeling that some voters are insisting on Firefox out of personal preference. > From the wiki: > > "The KDE SIG (Special Interest Group) is a group of Fedora contributors > that maintain KDE <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/KDE> packages in > Fedora. Their mission is to provide high-quality, usable KDE software > packages to Fedora users and developers and to support one another in > maintaining those packages." > > Granted, qupzilla is not an official KDE project, but it is definitely > using KDE based technologies. That tells me that all things considered, > if there is a browser that uses these technologies, and is functional - > that it should be favored over other contenders - unless there is a > complelling reason. Unless I'm missing something, I don't see that > "compelling reason". Personal preference does NOT outweigh a mission > statement. I agree completely. > What am I missing here? From an outsider looking in, it appears that > everyone is voting based upon different criteria and not adhering to the > mission statement. Voting members have a responsibility to be consistent > and objective. Right. This is exactly why I requested justification in the meeting, but the request was shot down. Kevin Kofler _______________________________________________ kde mailing list kde@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/kde@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
