“Since when has the world of computer software design been about what people want? This is a simple question of evolution. The day is quickly coming when every knee will bow down to a silicon fist, and you will all beg your binary gods for mercy.” Bill Gates
For the sake of the users, let’s assume Bill was either wrong or (||) sarcastic.
Let’s say that we want to deliver Freedom and privacy to the users and that we want to be more effective at that. We plan to do that through quality software products and communication — that’s how we reach new users and keep them loving our software.
We can’t get away with half-assed software that more or less always shows clear signs of “in progress”, we need to think our software through from a users point of view and then build the software accordingly. We need to present our work at eye-level with commercial software vendors, it needs to be clear that we’re producing software fully reliable on a professional level. Our planning, implementation, quality and deployment processes need to be geared towards this same goal.
We need processes that allow us to deliver fixes to users within days, if not hours. Currently in most end-user scenario, it often takes months and perhaps even a dist-upgrade for a fix for a functional problem with our software.
The fun of all this lies in a more rewarding experience of making successful software, and learning to work together across the whole stack (including communication) to work together on this goal.
So, with these objectives in mind, where do we go from here? The answer is of course that we’re already underway, not at a very fast speed, but many of us have good understanding of many of the above structural goals and found solutions that work well.
Take tighter and more complete quality control, being at the heart of the implementation, as an example. We have adopted better review processes, more unit testing, more real-world testing and better feedback cycles with the community, especially the KDE Frameworks and Plasma stacks are well maintained and stabilized at high speeds. We can clearly say that the Frameworks idea worked very well technically but also from an organizational point of view, we have spread the maintainership over many more shoulders, and have been able to vastly simplify the deployment model (away from x.y.z releases). This works out because we test especially the Frameworks automatically and rather thoroughly through our CI systems. Within one year of Frameworks 5, our core software layer has settled into a nice pace of stable incremental development.
On the user interaction side, the past years have accompanied our interaction designers with visual artists. This is clearly visible when comparing Plasma 4 to Plasma 5. We have help from a very active group of visual designers now for about one and a half year, but have also adopted stricter visual guidelines in our development process and forward-thinking UI and user interaction design. These improvements in our processes have not just popped up, they are the result of a cultural shift towards opening the KDE also to non-coding contributors, and creating an atmosphere where designers feel welcome and where they can work productively in tandem with developers on a common goal. Again, this shows in many big and small usability, workflow and consistency improvements all over our software.
To strengthen the above processes and plug the missing holes in the big picture to make great products, we have to ask ourselves the right questions and then come up with solutions. Many of them will not be rocket science, some may take a lot of effort by many. This should not hold us back, as a commonly shared direction and goal is needed anyway, regardless of ability to move. We need to be more flexible, and we need to be able to move swiftly on different fronts. Long-standing communities such as KDE can sometimes feel to have the momentum of an ocean liner, which may be comfortable but takes ages to move, while it really should have the velocity, speed and navigational capabilities of a zodiak.
By design, Free Culture communities such as ours can operate more efficiently (through sharing and common ownership) than commercial players (who are restricted, but also boosted by market demands), so in principle, we should be able to offer competitive solutions promoting Freedom and privacy.
Our users need merciful
binary source code gods and deserve top-notch silicon fists.