whistles innocently

As a Board member now, I'll answer this one. To a certain extent I ran for a seat on the Board because I realized that proposing this via a Goal was the wrong place to do it, and the more effective way to push for that change was by being on the Board. And now that I've been elected there, yes I do still want to do it and push for it internally where possible. However now that I have a fuller picture of the e.V.'s situation, I realize that there are budgetary concerns that must be met before we do more hiring, and KDE e.V. operates under extremely strict German nonprofit rules that make it not as simple as it might appear. Now, in an ideal world this person would be effectively self-funding, but we need to make sure we can afford them in the first place! It's a bit of a chicken-egg situation, really.

Note that we've already done a certain amount of professionalizing KDE inasmuch as it means "KDE e.V. hires professionals to work on KDE." KDE e.V. does indeed now employ multiple technical engineers to work on various areas of the software stack, and I want to see this grow even more. But, we need more money to make it happen, and until we do have that employed professional fundraiser, it's up to existing members of the Board and the community to improve the revenue side of the equation so that it becomes possible! That's why I'm so happy with the progress of the current fundraiser. 700 new members means at least 70,000€ of new recurring yearly income, which is enormous for KDE e.V. If we can keep up this kind of fundraising performance, we can do so much cool stuff in the next few years.

Sure, but Qt is the largest C++ toolkit in the world with millions of developers, so it's not exactly a small niche thing that someone who knows C++ hasn't heard of. :)

Something that's often not mentioned is that C++ with Qt is often a very different beast to use compared to C++ with the stdlib and other GUI frameworks. IMO Qt takes a lot of the pain out of C++, such that the criticism becomes blunted and mostly articulated by people looking in from outside who haven't tried it yet.

One of the most visible ones for me is that most common multimonitor workflows Just Work™ in the Wayland session now. There are still edge cases, but we've put a huge amount of effort into this.

Actually Plasma is generally more popular than GNOME every time surveys are conducted. However we have to keep in mind that the direct consumers of a DE are actually not the end users, but rather the distributors who package and distribute it. There are a number of historical reasons why many distributors ended up picking GNOME over Plasma including accessibility, corporate sponsorship, an easier packaging experience, and the rocky KDE 4 rollout burning a lot of trust. So what you end up with today is many distros shipping GNOME despite pent-up desire for Plasma. It's a great illustration of how you need to keep your direct users happy.

And I think that pent-up desire is being unleashed these days due to various changes in our ecosystem. Plasma is better than ever and version 5 had a much less painful release compared to 4, with us aiming to do even better in Plasma 6. We also see an increasing number of hardware vendors shipping devices with Plasma on it (https://kde.org/hardware/), who had a strong financial incentive to listen to their customers by picking Plasma over GNOME. In addition, KDE's accessibility game is ramping up hugely, and we have more robust corporate sponsorship than we used to with Valve and Blue Systems putting tons of resources into KDE. Finally, GNOME seems to be becoming more hostile to their downstreams, causing them to need to do more of their own development or else migrate to be a fork or skin of Plasma. Interesting developments.