Re: [trinity-users] K menu organisation in Trinity

On 26/02/13 00:35, C W wrote: That is completely irrelevant to anything. This is not a debate about giving credit to the KDE project. This is a discussion about three things: 1) Trinity was deliberately started to keep the old KDE 3 look and feel, when the KDE developers decided to change direction; the question becomes, should Trinity stay like KDE 3, or should it become like KDE 4? 2) How many user interface options are too many? Consistency in software is a good thing, just ask Apple. Too many options make an unusable, untestable mess. Just because a choice exists doesn't mean we have to offer it. 3) Is it a good thing for Trinity to have a different look and feel depending on where you get it from? Alexandre has released Trinity for PCLinuxOS, which is great. But he's also unilaterally changed the look and feel by default so that PCLinuxOS Trinity is different from Trinity elsewhere. Should we encourage that, or should we insist (as much as can be reasonably expected) that Trinity will look and feel the same whether you are running it under Debian, Fedora, Ubuntu, SUSE, Linux Mint, PCLinuxOS, or even MacOS. (If that is possible.) *My personal feelings* are: - Trinity should be very conservative about moving away from the KDE 3 look and feel. I'm not suggesting that KDE 3 was "perfect" and never to change anything, but we should be cautious about changing what is the distinctive Trinity/KDE 3 look. If people want KDE 4, they have KDE 4. Trinity is for people who want KDE 3's look and feel. - KDE 3, and Trinity, already have a bewildering array of configuration options. Adding new options adds complexity and confusion. We should resist the urge to pile even more options onto the software except where they bring real benefit. - If Trinity is to become a serious player in the desktop environment ecosystem, it needs to have a consistent, and distinct, look and feel regardless of what distro you run it under. Thank you for listening. -- Steven