Re: [kde-community] Request to join the Kde incubator for GCompris
Le 19/02/2014 21:24, David Edmundson a écrit : What I see as a problem is that this has an implicit attached request to our current KDE Windows releasing team saying they shouldn't package and release GCompris. It would be unfair on Bruno for our KDE Windows team to do so. Legally they absolutely can, but it would still be more than a little bit rude. It's also equally unfair on our KDE Windows team to ever prevent them from doing so. I think it does open up some very interesting questions, not just here but for other cases where our Android/iOS porting becomes popular on how to do this in a manner that is fair to everyone. Money can easily cause a lot of tension and arguments. I'd like a discussion on it and maybe some guidelines. Hi, Yes I confirm that this is an important question and we must think about it before going further. Distributing 2 different binary versions of GCompris, one on gcompris.net with an activation code and one on kde.org without would be unfair and confusing for the users. Like you mention it would be much more confusing on Android/iOS. Even if you take out the activation issue, it is very confusing to have different application with the same name being build and distributed by several organization. It is the rule on GNU/Linux and we are used to work that way but on the other platforms it is not practical. Bruno. ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Request to join the Kde incubator for GCompris
Le 20/02/2014 09:37, Martin Gräßlin a écrit : On Thursday 20 February 2014 09:03:04 Bruno Coudoin wrote: Le 19/02/2014 21:24, David Edmundson a écrit : What I see as a problem is that this has an implicit attached request to our current KDE Windows releasing team saying they shouldn't package and release GCompris. It would be unfair on Bruno for our KDE Windows team to do so. Legally they absolutely can, but it would still be more than a little bit rude. It's also equally unfair on our KDE Windows team to ever prevent them from doing so. I think it does open up some very interesting questions, not just here but for other cases where our Android/iOS porting becomes popular on how to do this in a manner that is fair to everyone. Money can easily cause a lot of tension and arguments. I'd like a discussion on it and maybe some guidelines. Hi, Yes I confirm that this is an important question and we must think about it before going further. Distributing 2 different binary versions of GCompris, one on gcompris.net with an activation code and one on kde.org without would be unfair and confusing for the users. Like you mention it would be much more confusing on Android/iOS. Even if you take out the activation issue, it is very confusing to have different application with the same name being build and distributed by several organization. It is the rule on GNU/Linux and we are used to work that way but on the other platforms it is not practical. But you cannot prevent it. If for example I don't like that you distribute it with an activation code I can take the source and distribute it without the activation code. Hi, It is true and this is not specific to free software or to GCompris. The software industry at large learned to live with people distributing unauthorized version. The difference with free software is that it is legal to do so. What happens in this case is that the original author request the unauthorized distributor to change the name of the software. It is what happened with RedHat versus CentOS or Firefox versus Iceweasel. In our case the situation is different because it would be legitimate to have a build on gcompris.net and one on kde.org thus both parties have to define the rules. Given that I don't think it really matters at the moment. You have to be prepared that others will provide binaries (whether it's friendly (e.g. KDE) or unfriendly (someone just going for the money)). I am prepared to that and this issue is already present for the Gtk+ version. I have been somewhat protected by the complexity of doing a build on Windows and MacOSX. Maybe this could be split of into a new thread to brainstorm ideas around that and how to fairly distribute the income as that can raise conflicts. I am open do discussion on this matter. Bruno. ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Request to join the Kde incubator for GCompris
Le 19/02/2014 13:43, Agustin a écrit : Hi Bruno, I am Agustin Benito, KDE eV Treasurer. Thanks for providing us the information around the income that GConpris generates. We do not have a clear policy about this topic. I do not see a major problem in this area. Hi, I have no problem sharing this information but not on a public list. As you are interested I'll give you some details in private. We have a wide variety of different business models used by KDE developers to generate income. Your experience will help us to provide better answers to KDE developers in the future in this area. Sure, I have an long lasting experience and I am always pleased to share it. Each project is different and what worked for GCompris maybe inappropriate for another software. I already proposed to make a conference on that topic during a meeting in a Toulouse Lug Kde event. Bruno. ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Future Git Plans
Le 15/02/2014 11:55, Aaron J. Seigo a écrit : This email serves two purposes: one, to inform the community of the direction we would like to go with KDE's Git hosting and request feedback; two, to ask for volunteer projects that are willing to act as crash test dummies for the new system, helping us figure out the best way to set it up, work out kinks, etc. Due to the bleeding-edge nature, we're currently limiting this to self-contained projects, such as those in Extragear. I’d be happy to engage in this process with Sprinter. It’s self-contained and active. Hi, If we go further in GCompris's move to KDE it may be a good option to put it on the test platform. It can be done really fast, all we have for the new Qt Quick version is a GitHub. Bruno. ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Request to join the Kde incubator for GCompris
Le 13/02/2014 22:15, Albert Astals Cid a écrit : Wait, does GCompris require for copyright assignment to the FSF? No it does not. I know that it is a FSF recommendation but we never followed it. In GCompris all the copyright are assigned to their authors. Bruno. ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
