Am Sonntag, 17. April 2022, 00:01:53 CEST schrieb o lu:
> Developers having information like this will eliminate the need for
> conversations like this...
Not really. Usage data could play a role in informing part of the discussion
("which plugins are actively used?"), but won't change the big picture:
1. There is a legacy technology (kipi) that used to be great but was in
decline for many years before it was abandoned by its authors.
Nobody stepped up to rescue the old technology.
2. There is a newer technology (purpose) that fits at least the part of the
use-case that is discussed here (export plugins).
3. The new technology has not yet(?) implemented part of the functionality of
the legacy technology [1]
[1] https://phabricator.kde.org/T10525#189748
4. Nobody stepped up to port/implement the missing functionality for the new
technology
So, yes, telemetry data could help us in making an informed choice where to
put the effort. Still, somebody would need to actually do the work.
Telemetry data would not change the discussion on two of the following three
points:
a. Do applications need to support both technologies even if they are very
similar in scope?
b. Is having two slightly different plugin systems an acceptable user
experience?
c. Is dropping support for the legacy technology an acceptable user
experience?
Cheers,
Johannes
