Matthew Garrett wrote:
> That's certainly an argument, though it's a harder one to make - it's
> not easy to show that changing #1 will result in #2 changing. However,
> it is easy to argue that treating KDE as equivalent to Gnome without
> having equivalent developer resources causes some level of cost for our
> users. Are the long term benefits worth it? Perhaps, but that's hard to
> quantify. Maybe we'd just end up reducing interest in Fedora as a whole
> and everyone would suffer.
Judging from the quantity of happy users of Fedora+KDE we have, I don't
think we have any actual problems making our users happy despite our
somewhat limited (but growing over time) manpower. ("We" was "Fedora KDE
SIG" in that sentence.) This "we (Fedora) have to protect our users from
that understaffed, poorly supported desktop" argument just makes no sense
when you look at the facts. KDE is NOT poorly supported in Fedora. Our
manpower is limited (and yes, the way we present KDE is one of the reasons
for that!), but not insufficient.
Kevin Kofler
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
