How about a choose 3 Feature in a list of more than 5 or 2 feature in a list of less than 5.
Where you are force to choose 3 or 2 [the way we vote in monthly contest] (kinda rank choice)
Whichever you choose first is your most like feature, the other 2 are fall backs.
that will eliminate someone auto ranking 10/10 what they like the most and i think the infrastructure is already present.
I’m not sure. I think it has to do with the idea that I can’t just earn more respect through hard work in krita and time spent with the program. I’m so used to working on things, constantly trying to improve, that having years of my life spent in Krita mean nothing is depressing.
If Krita doesn’t already have someone hired for that then It’d probably the longest running or most contributing dev.
I would hope that the person directing the program’s development would be experienced in the program yes.
No, I’m terrible at group projects and project management. I usually do everything myself if I want something done.
Absolutely not, if I wanted a contributor to bow to my will and add exactly what I want I’d give them a reason to, like money. No one owes me anything for being me. And the things that get me annoyed aren’t even ‘Krita steering’ sized, they’re just minor things like ‘Hey this is mildly annoying’. I spent nearly 4 hours today typing up and animating an example video for a new feature suggestion that I wouldn’t even use.
I have a lot of problems, but I absolutely do not feel like I should steer or control Krita as a whole.
I agree, I’ve said several times now that I have no viable solution for “experience” being weighted toward suggestions or bugs and I don’t expect there to be one.
This is what I normally do in my life, and to be honest I’m very close to trying (again). Every time I feel mildly screwed over by something I learn how to do it myself. But this is different, when Tumblr kicked me off for no fault of my own I learned how to make websites so I could host my own art. But that’s for me, if I did things wrong or un-optimally it didn’t affect anyone else, it was my own problem.
I’ve never coded anything in C++, never touched QT or KDE, and while I have 0 doubt that I could go and fix or add a lot of my own bugs or suggestions, what I truly fear is becoming a burden to actual devs who now not only have to make the program better, but read over and decline my MR’s as well because of the horrendous coding decisions.
And that’s why I feel stuck. I feel like I can’t help with writing suggestions because the lack of feedback (good or bad) drives me insane, and I feel I can’t help with development because it’d just end up being burdensome to actual devs. So all I do right now that helps even a bit is report bugs when I find them.
Or you could give everyone X points to spend, so they can be distributed across ideas. But by now, you’d have to implement a new system to perform the voting. I doubt it could be hosted on discord.
Or maybe we could leverage it’s poll system? But that would be without fallback as people would be able to corrupt the voting by voting on the same idea as fallback options.
Yep the X points with a cap on max point spend is also a good idea 
Though i dunno if there is an existing poll system for that - that will work on discord or this forum. That’s the roadblock for now.
I consider Krita a public property: everyone has an equal access to it. They can use it for whatever they want, and make any changes they find appropriate. It’s great if you can code, as then you can get yourself a change you want, and maybe even make other people lives easier, by sharing your work.
Not everyone can and want to code though - it’s fine, but raises a problem. You’re dependent on others, and no matter who you are, and what you already did to the community, you’ll have to ask people to do free work for you, which is just as tricky as it sounds.
Unlike Krita itself, I consider Krita devs not a public property. Those are just normal people with skills and good intentions, who believe in putting their work to the software, that will be given to everybody with no income. Some of them already have a years of experience on running this thing, and after all they made krita what it is now, so I trust them enough to donate to the foundation.
Will it make my feature requests a bigger priority? I hope not. Some of my suggestions on ongoing work got implemented, but I never had luck with convincing people to my standalone requests. Turns out other users are just not that excited about those ideas as I was 
So now I just trust they’ll be making good decisions and use my money well. It would be cool to do some changes in krita myself, but I’m way to lazy for that
Allowing users to purchase more voting points by donating to Krita would be great too. I believe something similar was suggested in the thread before this one that got off topic.
That’s typically the kind of solution that could make me going away…
Grum999
@Grum999 the idea is that the list of voteable features is already curated by the devs. So it’s certainly not pay to get feature X implemented.
But it’s just an idea to bridge the user-developer gap, the devs are just as important as the users are in this and, again, I think they are doing a great job as is. They are already very active on this forum!
Result is the same
The more you have money, the more you can decide…
Let people without any resources aside…
Grum999
yeah without the initial shortlisting.
We might end up getting a feature voted that is not feasible for the current state of Krita [by virtue of code/ resources or other thing].
Though idk what to feel for the buy x points to vote with.
If its similar to kick starter before ill guess ill be fine otherwise i feel a little bit icky about that cause like how 10/10 can corrupt the vote , money for points can skew voting as well.
I understand your point, well, if you were to have categories for feature requests/ workflow polish, you could add one more slot to vote on for paying users. If this helps raise funding and everyone can more or less participate equally then its win win in my book.
So I’m thinking that the paid feature would be mutually exclusive with the non-paid ones, so money doesn’t overrule the non-paying part of the community. It’s just a thought, it’s more that I could see myself pay for a vote.
There is this one very experienced artist directing Krita development, it’s @deevad 
He is one of the oldest Krita users, probably, he’s a professional artist and he’s on this let’s say consultant role for over a decade now, if not longer. He’s incredibly valuable because while he says he’s “not technical”, he does understand the developer’s point of view and can prioritize features based on a balance between dev’s effort and time and ghe usefulness of the feature. He can explain the problem and suggest solutions. When I ask which GUI is better, he can say which.
He’s useful enough that I try not to overuse it and only ask when necessary. If more users like this were available, that would be awesome, but… it’s actually pretty hard to do. And it requires trust too, since it’s just one person. (This is the kind of “job” that I’m already doing something and I need help with good GUI or to evaluate what tasks I should do in a limited time, or when I’m trying to plan development of a specific bigger feature and it’s not as straightforward to just go ahead and implement it).
Yeah but the first just makes the voting system not work right, the second benefits Krita directly.
I don’t see how it’s any ‘worse’ than hiring someone to develop a specific feature.
I’m glad to see a professional artist leading the team, gives hope that it’s not directionless.
It will end up favoring the features of the side with more money. The one who maybe don’t earn as much might end up not winning any polish or feature upgrades. It gives a pay2win feel . This might end up discouraging those who have not large income to participate / in this scenario they are the one who will end up not getting heard.
I have 2 proposed solution;
I mean that’s how it is. A lot of people have told me in this thread that I’m not owed anything for free and I agreed with them, now you’re suggesting the devs should consider people’s ideas for free because paying the devs is unfair to those that don’t.
I fully support donations being used to help decide on which features are more likely to get polish. After all it’s the dev’s time and it should be compensated for. Yes that means people with more money get their polish quicker, but if funding for Krita is what you want, you have to pander to the people who donate a bit.
I would certainly cap points to be like max. 10% additional points.
Otherwise, I would differentiate between paid and free voteable features.
Though I think the pay/ not pay discussion is getting offtopic with regards to user - dev relation.
Even if I donate - I’m not owed their time. Its not because for free - or donated. So you saying i can’t advocate for students, or people who might not have means to donate but otherwise have other expertise they can contribute. [like bug testing , insight , etc] .
We are just not owed that as special case. If you really want that kind of push - i think there is a donation tier that do that or hire a dev. [IDK]
This is not a paid software its a for donation software. What do you think Krita is.
the reason i’m here and some of us is here is because krita is OSS.
This is OSS software for fsake. Some people only has this software in this disposal to able to enter the world of digital painting. Some of them are student, some have fallen to tough times. Some have different expertise.
I also just hate pay 2 win so.
[Ok i know this is off topic. ] That line jsut riled me up, Sorry @raghukamath .
So is there a developer artists gap or not? Why did you assume that it didn’t have any artists on the team and is directionless? As I said it is bad to assume anything. Join the team. Help us. Just don’t get frustrated when your point is not the winning point. We need many people like deevad.
For me this post sounded like personal opinion which is fine but it generalized that opinion as fact on all users. Get involved more and you will realise that is not the case.
Through the evolution of this discussion I’ve agreed that the perceived gap is likely something more personal or assumed than actually existing.
Because I felt there was a gap between the artists and developers. Learning more about the team and their expertise has helped a lot, maybe that’s something Krita can work on if you’re looking for suggestions.
Have I given that impression? Where? I’ve conceded various points several times so far in this thread and changed numerous preconceived notions. I don’t get angry when my points are shot down, I get angry when they’re ignored.
As much as I’d love to be able to help with both art and development, I feel a bit too much like a black sheep to feel accepted. I can try to be more proactive with development if I haven’t already marred devs opinions of me, but it’s going to be hard because the barrier to entry is very high and I’m much more of an artist than a programmer.
Do not get me wrong, I may sound rude, I am sorry for that. It is really good that your preconceptions are gone now.
How can we change this preconception if it occurs. Do you think we need a team page on the website? Will people read it?
They might get ignored for various reasons, there is no dedicated person to give response to all the posts. Some people might not feel qualified to respond to your post. Some people might be confused by the posts etc etc. It is not that they are purposely ignored. So please do not get frustrated.
We are not developers. deevad is also not a developer by profession. however he may have gained the understanding of the concept by being in the community for so long. So again this your own preconception which is wrong. It is okay to not know anything about code. you can help in other ways. Developers wont treat you with preconceived notion.