On 2011-07-05, Ilya Chernykh <anixxsus@...> wrote:
> On Tuesday 05 July 2011 11:58:01 Timothy Pearson wrote:
>
>> I received this Email recently from a Trinity user, and am reposting it
>> here so that we all can get a better bead on what our users are wanting to
>> see.
>>
>> Tim
>
>>  Needs serous rebranding, since packets are still marked as kde3,
>> until rebranding is done trinity will be considered a KDE3.5 keep alive
>> and not a separate desktop environment. This will prevent it from
>> gaining popularity for example as lightweight alternative to kde4, gnome
>> or other interfaces.
>
> Untrue. KDE is a more recognizable brand. If "Trinity" was invented as a
> separate DE without any
> connection to KDE3, it would  still be unknown.

No, I agree. We need to make sure that people know this is the Trinity DE.
This was already discussed how we want to keep the branding in the
March? Monthly Meeting.

>
>>  It's unnecessary to keep KOffice alive. KOffice is outdated and
>> anyway incompatible with file-types most people use (those of MS Office
>> or OO.org).
>
> Untrue. It has a basic support for ODF/ODT, and better support can be ported
> from KDE4.

And how much time and effort will that take? Right now the theme is
fixing bugs, not making new functionality.

My opinion is that if we can take better and newer Qt4 applications
and port them to TQt instead of keeping old ones with the same
functionality and name alive, that sounds like a better option to me.

>
>> We have OO.org and it's derivate. At most, taking oo.org and
>> making a fork in qt4 would be reasonable
>
> Untrue. OpenOffice is not Qt4-based. Porting it to Qt is an enorm
ous work
>  (already attempted by a team, unsuccessfully, now abandoned).

I agree - this is enormous work.

The Libreoffice team is happy to accept a TQt interface theme, so if
it makes LO more integrated into Trinity, it seems reasonable. But
that's not in any priority right now.

>
>> For maintenance reasons, and to simplify work on upgrading trinity
>> some of the original kde3.5 apps should be abandoned.
>
> DE without apps does not make sense.

Depends what apps.

>
>> next would be digikam
>> which has newer versions for kde4.
>
> Dikikam's KDE4 version is closely integrated with KDE4. It is impossible to
> use it without
> installing KDE4. The same is with all other KDE4 applications.
>
>> The main problem behind maintaining and creating trinity versions of
>> some apps from kde3.5 which now have versions for kde4 is that if they
>> are kept the two projects will end having apps which are or totally
>> different (and maintained by different teams) and have same names
>
> This is already the case, blame the KDE4 team. You cannot reconcile the two:
> KDE4 apps use KDE4 libraries and cannot be separated from KDE4.
>

Sadly, yes. It seems to me that we're probably the ones who will have
to rebrand...

-- 
later, Robert Xu + rxu AT lincomlinux DOT org