I would like to collect some opinions of Plasma users, just for fun, to get a better image. poll poll A big cause of issues that only occur on the user’s side is “changing settings away from the default”. It would be impossible to test all these cases. poll A desktop with a few bugs may be very fine for an advanced user, but problematic if the administrator is not around to help. poll Last question: poll

I am not a KDE dev, but interested in that topic.

To partiticipate you can sign up in the forum, and maybe stay a bit and help other users ;)

  • boredsquirrel@slrpnk.netOP
    0·
    4 months ago

    Yes I agree. There is a switch you can use to block installing Addons.

    But that is also not nice. Sandboxing them, having a manual review process, would help. But that is a TON of work.

    I also change some things like UI buttons and find it to be a core requirement. At the same time, I could live without extreme theming, or just having widgets on the panel, or just having a bottom panel etc.

    This is a difficult decision, so I thought it would be a good idea to just find out what some users want.

    • mox@lemmy.sdf.org
      0·
      4 months ago

      Sandboxing them, having a manual review process, would help. But that is a TON of work.

      This is why it would make sense to have a restrictive and simple API that supports basic extensions with little oversight. Configuration only; no executable code.

      For the small minority of add-ons that would require executable code, there could be a separate API with a more involved installation process, making it obvious to the user that the trust and risk levels are different from the above. A sandbox feature could perhaps be developed in the long run, but that is indeed a ton of work and hard to get right, and isn’t really necessary for this approach to be effective. Just having a software-style installation process (e.g. through a distro’s package manager) and different APIs would go a long way toward protecting users.