Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - an alternative draft for discussion
On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 10:05:20 PM CET Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > KDE is an end-user focused, openly governed community of free software > enthusiasts that strives to provide graphical user interfaces and > applications for end-users for all types of computers across the device > spectrum: desktops PCs, laptops, tablets, smartphones, etc. In the world of IT we see again and again the introduction of disruptive technologies which change the field of computing. In the past KDE as a community mastered some of them great, some of them badly. When KDE started the world was in the middle of the disruption known as the Internet. KDE handled it great. Today basically every person connecting to the Internet is using a KDE technology for that. The next disruption "mobile" wasn't handled well, though. We were years too late and still haven't really got there. From our hundreds of applications only 3 are available on the most important distribution channel for mobile application. We clearly missed this disruption. Currently we are again in an disruptive stage. We have the cloud and social networks. Again we are moving slowly and are not adapting to the disruptive change. But we had good cards for cloud with e.g. ownCloud. Overall I don't see any strategy on how to move our applications into the cloud and how to integrate the cloud better. We were great in the Internet age, but are not catching up. Similar the social net is not integrated at all into our products. Thus I would conclude that we are missing this disruption just like the last one. Personally I think that we missed them because we didn't have a clear vision on where to go and were too focused on the good old things. Thus now my question: How will this vision provide us guidance for the next disruption? How will we be able to use this vision to be a leader in the next disruption? Please explain why you think that the vision will help in the next disruption. If you don't think that the vision is for that please also explain why you think that. E.g. if you think we shouldn't care about the next disruption, please explain the reasoning for it. Thank you! Martin signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - first draft for discussion
On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 10:10:27 AM CET Lydia Pintscher wrote: > The first draft reads as follows: > "KDE, through the creation of Free software, enables users to control > their digital life. KDE software enables privacy, makes simple things > easy and complex scenarios possible while crossing device boundaries." In the world of IT we see again and again the introduction of disruptive technologies which change the field of computing. In the past KDE as a community mastered some of them great, some of them badly. When KDE started the world was in the middle of the disruption known as the Internet. KDE handled it great. Today basically every person connecting to the Internet is using a KDE technology for that. The next disruption "mobile" wasn't handled well, though. We were years too late and still haven't really got there. From our hundreds of applications only 3 are available on the most important distribution channel for mobile application. We clearly missed this disruption. Currently we are again in an disruptive stage. We have the cloud and social networks. Again we are moving slowly and are not adapting to the disruptive change. But we had good cards for cloud with e.g. ownCloud. Overall I don't see any strategy on how to move our applications into the cloud and how to integrate the cloud better. We were great in the Internet age, but are not catching up. Similar the social net is not integrated at all into our products. Thus I would conclude that we are missing this disruption just like the last one. Personally I think that we missed them because we didn't have a clear vision on where to go and were too focused on the good old things. Thus now my question: How will this vision provide us guidance for the next disruption? How will we be able to use this vision to be a leader in the next disruption? Please explain why you think that the vision will help in the next disruption. If you don't think that the vision is for that please also explain why you think that. E.g. if you think we shouldn't care about the next disruption, please explain the reasoning for it. Thank you! Martin signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] RFC: Distribution outreach program
Hi, On Wednesday 03 February 2016 14:57:02 Martin Graesslin wrote: > On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 1:46:16 PM CET Luca Beltrame wrote: > > Il Wed, 03 Feb 2016 11:40:58 +0100, Martin Graesslin ha scritto: > > > to use a specific technology. It's totally fine if we go ahead and say > > > our technology stack includes systemd, networkmanager and apparmor. If > > > your distro cannot do that it's not providing the best expected > > > experience. In reality we don't have the manpower to test multiple > > > > I'm answering you but this is a point more general, which I overlooked > > before: don't forget that distributions ship other software! > > > > And said software has to work and coexist with KDE software. So as a > > distribution, often we have to take compromises to ensure everything works > > as intended. > > Yes I know, that's the obvious reply you get from distros. And I call > BULLSHIT to that. If a distribution ships with a broken bluetooth setup, > because another desktop requires an outdated version there is something > broken in this so deeply that I cannot find words about it. I think part of the Problem is that those reports end up with you and are not triaged on the distribution level. I can totally see your point there but I disagree with your general mistrust of Distributors and their choices. If a Distributor makes a bad choice, of course he should end up with the annoyed users and not you! But if your solution for that is not to give distributors any choices I disagree with you. They also want to provide the best user experience for their Use Cases. I've just wrote a mail to release-team [1] suggesting a way to mitigate at least some of the problems we face with distributions. In particular unqualified bugreports that are due to packaging problems. In general I think a bug should go through a distribution maintainer before it reaches a developer. While I know that this is not realistic to work in 100% of the cases we might want to encourage this. Regards, Andre 1: https://mail.kde.org/pipermail/release-team/2016-February/009278.html -- Andre Heinecke | ++49-541-335083-262 | http://www.intevation.de/ Intevation GmbH, Neuer Graben 17, 49074 Osnabrück | AG Osnabrück, HR B 18998 Geschäftsführer: Frank Koormann, Bernhard Reiter, Dr. Jan-Oliver Wagner signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Differences between proposed vision drafts (or "inclusive" vs "focused")
Hi, On Thursday, February 04, 2016 07:53:06 Martin Graesslin wrote: > On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 11:44:35 PM CET Alexander Dymo wrote: > > I reread both drafts and realized that people who have not > > participated in the development of these proposals might miss the > > important difference between them. > > > > The Lydia & Co see KDE providing users free software to manage any > > aspect of their digital life: GUI environments, applications (GUI and > > not), knowledge management systems, etc. > > > > The AlexN. & Co see KDE providing users free GUI environments and > > applications that work on any computing device: desktop, laptop, > > tablet, smartphone, or any other device present and future. > > may I ask where the focused group sees the future in a world beyond GUI, the vision draft we present here is not a long term vision which changes the future of computing. It presents ambitious, but realistic goals for the next few years. Currently KDE applications and the desktop are successful on desktop Linux (and BSD etc.). But there is so much territory to conquer beyond that, while (for now) staying focused on GUIs. Let's make KDE applications as well known as Firefox or LibreOffice. (This also implies that a vision statement needs updating over the years as circumstances change.) > I'm thinking of areas like: > * speech recognition (e.g. KDE Lera) Alex D. already replied to this, I agree with him. If it helps to achieve the goals, great. Speech recognition certainly does. (but still speech recognition is not the focus of KDE). > * IoT What exactly do you have in mind ? Is that covered by the statements on "portable applications incl. touch" and "user interface for embedded Linux" ? > * Sensors (think of the old joke of "Focus Follows Mind", but we're almost > there) Some years ago I was programming sensors by pushing bits on a wire from a PIC uC and looking at them with the oscilloscope... What do you have in mind with regard to KDE ? Alex ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Differences between proposed vision drafts (or "inclusive" vs "focused")
On 4 February 2016 at 20:49, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > On Thursday, February 04, 2016 20:38:52 Boudhayan Gupta wrote: > ... >> Under the "focused" proposal, such a software would have no place in >> the KDE Project. In fact, a software, developed within KDE to address >> KDE's (not KDE users but the KDE Project itself) needs cannot be a >> part of the KDE Project. Do we want this situation to arise? > > just answering for myself, but it seems to be the same as Alex D. is saying: > the four points listed in the draft are where we see the focus of KDE. > It would be stupid to exclude projects which support those. > KDE never did that, why should we start with that (arts, unsermake, icecream, > eigen, etc...) > Still we don't see linear algebra libraries or build tools as the main goal > KDE is trying to achieve (...says the guy who maintained the KDE buildsystem > for more than 7 years). Build helpers in a form of cmake scripts are part of the KF5 product, if I understand correctly. That's good. Not sure it was already raised: even while having focus on traditional apps: - server software can act as enabler for some KDE apps. Any multi-user app is in this group (not that KDE rules this 'market', sure there can be improvements, who codes decides); - mobile/embedded software can be enabler for some KDE apps, e.g. think of 1. remote-controlling presentation software with a mobile/embedded app 2. remote-data-entry mobile app for an inventory management app/ (and KF5 can further grow by the way; it's exciting to see how KDE is rather good at making new frameworks this way!) > > ___ > kde-community mailing list > kde-community@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community -- regards, Jaroslaw Staniek KDE: : A world-wide network of software engineers, artists, writers, translators : and facilitators committed to Free Software development - http://kde.org Calligra Suite: : A graphic art and office suite - http://calligra.org Kexi: : A visual database apps builder - http://calligra.org/kexi Qt Certified Specialist: : http://www.linkedin.com/in/jstaniek ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Differences between proposed vision drafts (or "inclusive" vs "focused")
On Thursday, February 04, 2016 20:38:52 Boudhayan Gupta wrote: ... > Under the "focused" proposal, such a software would have no place in > the KDE Project. In fact, a software, developed within KDE to address > KDE's (not KDE users but the KDE Project itself) needs cannot be a > part of the KDE Project. Do we want this situation to arise? just answering for myself, but it seems to be the same as Alex D. is saying: the four points listed in the draft are where we see the focus of KDE. It would be stupid to exclude projects which support those. KDE never did that, why should we start with that (arts, unsermake, icecream, eigen, etc...) Still we don't see linear algebra libraries or build tools as the main goal KDE is trying to achieve (...says the guy who maintained the KDE buildsystem for more than 7 years). Alex ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Differences between proposed vision drafts (or "inclusive" vs "focused")
And here is where I, perhaps surprisingly to you, agree with you. Like, 100% agree. I wrote "Plasma and applications", but should have written "applications and Plasma". It's the KDE apps that shine these days. Krita, Digikam, Kdenlive, K3B, Kate, Okular, and many and many others. In my opinion KDE as a whole will also shine if it brings our amazing software to as many platforms as we can. And many people in the community already do this work. The "focused" vision is about lifting the importance of this movement towards other platforms and devices, and actually focusing on it. It is, IMHO of course, not about going back to "let's just work on Linux desktop". I wouldn't call that a "vision", that would be "conservation". On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 9:26 AM, Martin Graesslin wrote: > On Thursday, February 4, 2016 8:53:57 AM CET Alexander Dymo wrote: >> Let's take one of your examples: some imaginary sensory tech that >> follows your mind. It's going to be a competitive advantage to both >> Plasma and applications, for sure. Can it be a KDE project? Yes, >> because it clearly brings KDE closer to its goal. And actually, both >> visions/missions would support inclusion of such a tech into KDE. > > Now that you make it more clear that the focus of a technology would be > whether it helps for example Plasma I need to chime in. > > As a maintainer of Plasma and as the maintainer of the largest single piece of > software inside Plasma I want to say that I'm against a focus on Plasma. I do > not want to see KDE decide for projects whether they give a "competitive > advantage" to Plasma. I thought we had left this years behind us. Although my > work is focused on Linux I'm happy for the Windows and OSX and Android efforts > and want KDE to be strong in these areas. I'm afraid that any focus on Plasma > will harm KDE and thus also Plasma. > > Furthermore I must observe that the KDE community as large does not care about > Plasma and a focus on Plasma. Please have a look on how many devs contribute > to e.g. KWin and the Wayland effort. It's what will take the desktop to the > next level, but hardly anybody works on it. So from my perspective: a focus on > the desktop is in all way wrong for KDE. That's not KDE. > > Cheers > Martin > ___ > kde-community mailing list > kde-community@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Differences between proposed vision drafts (or "inclusive" vs "focused")
On Thursday, February 4, 2016 8:53:57 AM CET Alexander Dymo wrote: > Let's take one of your examples: some imaginary sensory tech that > follows your mind. It's going to be a competitive advantage to both > Plasma and applications, for sure. Can it be a KDE project? Yes, > because it clearly brings KDE closer to its goal. And actually, both > visions/missions would support inclusion of such a tech into KDE. Now that you make it more clear that the focus of a technology would be whether it helps for example Plasma I need to chime in. As a maintainer of Plasma and as the maintainer of the largest single piece of software inside Plasma I want to say that I'm against a focus on Plasma. I do not want to see KDE decide for projects whether they give a "competitive advantage" to Plasma. I thought we had left this years behind us. Although my work is focused on Linux I'm happy for the Windows and OSX and Android efforts and want KDE to be strong in these areas. I'm afraid that any focus on Plasma will harm KDE and thus also Plasma. Furthermore I must observe that the KDE community as large does not care about Plasma and a focus on Plasma. Please have a look on how many devs contribute to e.g. KWin and the Wayland effort. It's what will take the desktop to the next level, but hardly anybody works on it. So from my perspective: a focus on the desktop is in all way wrong for KDE. That's not KDE. Cheers Martin signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Differences between proposed vision drafts (or "inclusive" vs "focused")
Hi, At this point, I need to butt in. On 4 February 2016 at 20:23, Alexander Dymo wrote: > Let's consider another example. This time it will be the imaginary > free Github replacement. This time the tech is too far away from > user-end apps and shells. Let's say it wants to join KDE. Under the > "inclusive" proposal such a project will be welcomed. Under "focused" > - no. There does exist a similar project, not yet widely publicised, yet is being developed as a KDE Project. It's called Propagator, and it manages a fleet of Git mirrors. We developed it ourselves because we needed to make our Anongit infrastructure more reliable, log sync failures, retry syncs on fail after with ever increasing backoffs, and also sync to GitHub (we do have a mirror there). It's here: https://phabricator.kde.org/diffusion/PROPAGATOR/. At this point only a few people know of this (mostly in the Sysadmin team) and I was going to give it a proper unveiling at conf.kde.in next month, but now the cat is out of the bag. The point is, Propagator is server software. It uses no KDE libs, is written in Python, and was developed to serve the sysadmin team's specific needs. Along the way, we realised that this could be made general-purpose enough to the extent we can offer it as a standalone product, being managed as part of the KDE Project. Under the "focused" proposal, such a software would have no place in the KDE Project. In fact, a software, developed within KDE to address KDE's (not KDE users but the KDE Project itself) needs cannot be a part of the KDE Project. Do we want this situation to arise? Propagator won't be the last piece of custom server software KDE will need. Being involved with the sysadmins to some degree, I've identified a few more areas where we'll need custom code that's extensive enough to be published as products in their own right. If we're only going to be "focused" on end-user software, we shoot ourselves in our foot by denying a home to software we've developed to solve our own problems, where the solutions are generic enough to be used by others. -- Boudhayan Gupta ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Differences between proposed vision drafts (or "inclusive" vs "focused")
Let's take one of your examples: some imaginary sensory tech that follows your mind. It's going to be a competitive advantage to both Plasma and applications, for sure. Can it be a KDE project? Yes, because it clearly brings KDE closer to its goal. And actually, both visions/missions would support inclusion of such a tech into KDE. Let's consider another example. This time it will be the imaginary free Github replacement. This time the tech is too far away from user-end apps and shells. Let's say it wants to join KDE. Under the "inclusive" proposal such a project will be welcomed. Under "focused" - no. PS: I did not say that _all_ new tech should be developed outside of KDE. What I wanted to say that for the free software project to succeed, it does not have to be included into any larger project/community. On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 8:15 AM, Martin Graesslin wrote: > On Thursday, February 4, 2016 7:52:34 AM CET Alexander Dymo wrote: >> Focused does not mean exclusive. Every technology (and not only >> technology) that gets us to the point where all users use KDE shells >> and apps (because of their superiority) is welcome. IMHO, of course. > > sorry, but I cannot follow you. What you wrote here is inclusive again. So > what you want now: focus on a technology or being inclusive to everything? > >> >> Another point is that not everything needs to be built in house. When >> I started free software development, it was harder for independent >> small projects to survive. It was much better for them to join the big >> groups, like GNU, GNOME, KDE, etc. Now this is not the case. So I'd >> expect some of the technologies that KDE can use to be actually >> developed elsewhere. > > And here you basically say any development on new technologies should happen > outside of KDE. Which is pretty excluding and contradicting to what you write > above. > > To me this is really confusing as I don't see how that can aid us in finding a > direction. > > Further clarifications are appreciated. Right now I'm more confused than > before. > > Cheers > Martin > >> >> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 12:53 AM, Martin Graesslin > wrote: >> > On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 11:44:35 PM CET Alexander Dymo wrote: >> >> I reread both drafts and realized that people who have not >> >> participated in the development of these proposals might miss the >> >> important difference between them. >> >> >> >> The Lydia & Co see KDE providing users free software to manage any >> >> aspect of their digital life: GUI environments, applications (GUI and >> >> not), knowledge management systems, etc. >> >> >> >> The AlexN. & Co see KDE providing users free GUI environments and >> >> applications that work on any computing device: desktop, laptop, >> >> tablet, smartphone, or any other device present and future. >> > >> > may I ask where the focused group sees the future in a world beyond GUI, >> > I'm thinking of areas like: >> > * speech recognition (e.g. KDE Lera) >> > * IoT >> > * Sensors (think of the old joke of "Focus Follows Mind", but we're almost >> > there) >> > >> > Cheers >> > Martin >> > ___ >> > kde-community mailing list >> > kde-community@kde.org >> > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community >> >> ___ >> kde-community mailing list >> kde-community@kde.org >> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community > > > ___ > kde-community mailing list > kde-community@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Differences between proposed vision drafts (or "inclusive" vs "focused")
On Thursday, February 4, 2016 7:52:34 AM CET Alexander Dymo wrote: > Focused does not mean exclusive. Every technology (and not only > technology) that gets us to the point where all users use KDE shells > and apps (because of their superiority) is welcome. IMHO, of course. sorry, but I cannot follow you. What you wrote here is inclusive again. So what you want now: focus on a technology or being inclusive to everything? > > Another point is that not everything needs to be built in house. When > I started free software development, it was harder for independent > small projects to survive. It was much better for them to join the big > groups, like GNU, GNOME, KDE, etc. Now this is not the case. So I'd > expect some of the technologies that KDE can use to be actually > developed elsewhere. And here you basically say any development on new technologies should happen outside of KDE. Which is pretty excluding and contradicting to what you write above. To me this is really confusing as I don't see how that can aid us in finding a direction. Further clarifications are appreciated. Right now I'm more confused than before. Cheers Martin > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 12:53 AM, Martin Graesslin wrote: > > On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 11:44:35 PM CET Alexander Dymo wrote: > >> I reread both drafts and realized that people who have not > >> participated in the development of these proposals might miss the > >> important difference between them. > >> > >> The Lydia & Co see KDE providing users free software to manage any > >> aspect of their digital life: GUI environments, applications (GUI and > >> not), knowledge management systems, etc. > >> > >> The AlexN. & Co see KDE providing users free GUI environments and > >> applications that work on any computing device: desktop, laptop, > >> tablet, smartphone, or any other device present and future. > > > > may I ask where the focused group sees the future in a world beyond GUI, > > I'm thinking of areas like: > > * speech recognition (e.g. KDE Lera) > > * IoT > > * Sensors (think of the old joke of "Focus Follows Mind", but we're almost > > there) > > > > Cheers > > Martin > > ___ > > kde-community mailing list > > kde-community@kde.org > > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community > > ___ > kde-community mailing list > kde-community@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Differences between proposed vision drafts (or "inclusive" vs "focused")
Focused does not mean exclusive. Every technology (and not only technology) that gets us to the point where all users use KDE shells and apps (because of their superiority) is welcome. IMHO, of course. Another point is that not everything needs to be built in house. When I started free software development, it was harder for independent small projects to survive. It was much better for them to join the big groups, like GNU, GNOME, KDE, etc. Now this is not the case. So I'd expect some of the technologies that KDE can use to be actually developed elsewhere. On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 12:53 AM, Martin Graesslin wrote: > On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 11:44:35 PM CET Alexander Dymo wrote: >> I reread both drafts and realized that people who have not >> participated in the development of these proposals might miss the >> important difference between them. >> >> The Lydia & Co see KDE providing users free software to manage any >> aspect of their digital life: GUI environments, applications (GUI and >> not), knowledge management systems, etc. >> >> The AlexN. & Co see KDE providing users free GUI environments and >> applications that work on any computing device: desktop, laptop, >> tablet, smartphone, or any other device present and future. >> > > may I ask where the focused group sees the future in a world beyond GUI, I'm > thinking of areas like: > * speech recognition (e.g. KDE Lera) > * IoT > * Sensors (think of the old joke of "Focus Follows Mind", but we're almost > there) > > Cheers > Martin > ___ > kde-community mailing list > kde-community@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?
> Just FTR, we don't give away our own slots, but we ask for slots after > we decide how many projects we are going to select. And with that I'm completely fine. Cheerio, Ivan -- KDE, ivan.cu...@kde.org, http://cukic.co/ gpg key id: 850B6F76 ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 4:08 PM, Ivan Čukić wrote: > I am *very* against giving our slots to non-kde projects. We already > had problems with this a few years ago, I would rather avoid the > unpleasantries that happened back then. Just FTR, we don't give away our own slots, but we ask for slots after we decide how many projects we are going to select. -- Bhushan Shah http://bhush9.github.io IRC Nick : bshah on Freenode ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?
On Thursday, February 4, 2016 11:38:56 AM CET Ivan Čukić wrote: > > I'm not sure whether it's against the manifesto. Is that really a > > "benefit" > > that we do some admin work for them? One could also see it as an > > I would not be against us being admins of an external project that has > its own slots. > > I am *very* against giving our slots to non-kde projects. We already > had problems with this a few years ago, I would rather avoid the > unpleasantries that happened back then. on the other hand last year we were not really able to fill the slots and lacked mentors. Cheers martin signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?
> I'm not sure whether it's against the manifesto. Is that really a "benefit" > that we do some admin work for them? One could also see it as an I would not be against us being admins of an external project that has its own slots. I am *very* against giving our slots to non-kde projects. We already had problems with this a few years ago, I would rather avoid the unpleasantries that happened back then. Cheers, Ivan ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] FOSDEM wrapup
On woensdag 3 februari 2016 12:58:58 CET Jonathan Riddell wrote: > We had a good presence at FOSDEM this year. Here's some notes while I > remember. > > Stall: > One 1 short table this year. We had a nice setup with ODROID board + HDMI > monitor (alas it wasn't a monitor which could tilt) to demo low cost > computers can run Plasma. We had my laptop for KDE neon and a Nexus 5 in a > stand for Plasma Phone. a4 display stands had colour sheets describing the > three projects. Me and David brought the kit on the train (which is faffy > but much easier than taking kit on a plane) with Rohan bringing his ODROID. > > I bought two large display banners for KDE and KDE neon which I've taken > back to my house, I need to reply to e.V. treasurer about getting those > paid for. I also bought stickers for KDE (name badges and to give away) > and KDE neon and have taken the spares back home. I also bought the money > box, a4 display stands, pens, tape and brought power extensions. > > We had t-shirts which Jose brought along from those left over from Akademy > as well as a money box and leaflets. > > Saturday sales: > Knitted Amigurimi Konqi Medium: 1 > KDE India T-shirts (these were very popular and we should buy more for next > year. They seem to be in Indian sizes where an XL is about a medium to us > fat Europeans.) > XL red: 1 > XL blue: 3 > 2XL organge: 1 > 3XL orange: 1 > Konqi t-shirts (white): > 2XL: 1 > L 1 > M: 1 > KDE Logo t-shirts (white): > XL: 1 > L: 1 > > We took over 300euro on the Saturday which Jose took home. > Sunday we ended up with over 320euro which Jose also took along with the > sales figures. > > Jose can you post the sales figures here and confirm the amount you're > transferring to e.v.? > > Saturday party: > I booked the first floor of La Paon again in Grand Place. No sponsors this > year so I took 20euro off everyone who attended. My guess of 200euro worth > of finger food seemed to work very well. We had 22 people pay for food, > less than last year I think which is to be expected since it was charged > for. After food was served I used the extra money to buy an additional > couple of beers for everyone. > > We had three talks in the Desktop room (more than any other project I > think) which were well received, KDE neon, WikiToLearn and CMakeDaemon. > > A telegram group was useful to keep in contact with people throughout the > weekend. > > Much beer was consumed which I think we can call a success. > > Jonathan Was great to meet you all and great work on the booth! Fun with the t-shirt sizes, at SCALE I was told European XXL is considered "sysadmin medium" there ;-) The name badges were absolutely awesome. Cheers, Jos -- Disclaimer: Everything I do and say is based on my view of the world today. I am not responsible for changes in the world, nor my view on it. Everything I say is meant in a positive and friendly way, unless explicitly stated otherwise. find me on blog.jospoortvliet.com ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?
On woensdag 3 februari 2016 22:28:34 CET Boudewijn Rempt wrote: > I don't even remember what I thought the last couple of times, but I > think it was something like this: > > "if these are projects that we can likely bring under our umbrella, yes, > we should, if that is not going to happen, then we shouldn't" > > I cannot imagine I ever thought something different, but it's possible, > and I remember someone telling me I was inconsistent, last year. I think this rule makes sense. I think it won't be hard to get an agreement on our base principles from projects like Subsurface and Tupi (I mean the social side of things, not the tech part) and it would be a first step towards bringing them into the fold. Seems a good move to me. In general, why don't we adopt a "yes unless" stance, rather than the opposite? If there's a good (not hypothetical) reason not to collaborate, fine - but otherwise, let's work with others. > On Wed, 3 Feb 2016, Martin Klapetek wrote: > > Hey, > > so in the couple previous years we have collectively and > > repeatedly rejected the idea of other projects, that are not > > KDE projects by the Manifesto, to participate in KDE GSoC. > > Namely we rejected Tupi and SubSurface solely because > > "not a KDE project", GCompris became a KDE project and > > then we let it participate. > > > > Last year we got a non-KDE project in our GSoC despite the > > previous years decisions, nobody really noticed and then there > > was a huge discussion if that's ok or not, but by that time it was > > a bit late. > > > > So I'd like to have this cleared - does the community agree to > > have non-KDE projects, those that do not follow the Manifesto, > > participate in our GSoC this year and in the following years? > > > > Imho this goes against the Manifesto as the projects gets to > > "enjoy the benefits" without the complying with "commitments" > > of the Manifesto. It's also less transparent overall (not able to > > monitor progress as it's not on KDE infrastructure), can lead > > to cheating and possibly kicking KDE out of GSoC in the worst > > possible outcome. > > > > On the other hand, every accepted project gets the mentoring > > organization some extra money, which is always handy. > > > > Cheers > > -- > > Martin Klapetek | KDE Developer -- Disclaimer: Everything I do and say is based on my view of the world today. I am not responsible for changes in the world, nor my view on it. Everything I say is meant in a positive and friendly way, unless explicitly stated otherwise. find me on blog.jospoortvliet.com ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] finding a clear vision for KDE - an alternative draft for discussion
On donderdag 4 februari 2016 07:45:54 CET Martin Graesslin wrote: > On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 10:05:20 PM CET Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > We are happy to get comments or any other feedback on this draft, and we > > are looking forward to a lively and constructive discussion about the > > future of KDE. > > I'm sorry to say, but I don't see any vision in your document. What is the > essence I should grasp from reading that document? The one thing which the > community can combine and rally behind it? What I see instead are various > goals/missions which I think would be covered by the vision draft shared by > Lydia. > > So can I have a TLDR of your vision statement? == KDE is an end-user focused, openly governed community of free software enthusiasts that strives to provide graphical user interfaces and applications for end-users for all types of computers across the device spectrum: desktops PCs, laptops, tablets, smartphones, etc. We believe that software should be free and respectful of the privacy of our users. Our values are stated in the KDE Manifesto. === That seems a decent TLDR. In bullet points: * end user focus * open government * FOSS * GUI applications for device spectrum * privacy This would put focus on developing Plasma, the various Applications and the Frameworks. Things like ownCloud, WikiFM, OCS or Kolab are relevant as far as desktop/application integration is concerned, but not core part of the KDE mission. Note that I'm not arguing for or against this, just trying to answer your question. > Cheers > Martin -- Disclaimer: Everything I do and say is based on my view of the world today. I am not responsible for changes in the world, nor my view on it. Everything I say is meant in a positive and friendly way, unless explicitly stated otherwise. find me on blog.jospoortvliet.com ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] FOSDEM wrapup
El Wednesday 03 February 2016 12:58:58, Jonathan Riddell escribió: > Saturday sales: > Knitted Amigurimi Konqi Medium: 1 > KDE India T-shirts (these were very popular and we should buy more for next > year. They seem to be in Indian sizes where an XL is about a medium to us > fat Europeans.) XL red: 1 I don't think that there were Indian sizes but they were fitted-cut sizes (I think all the straight-cut sizes have been sold in previous events). > XL blue: 3 > 2XL organge: 1 > 3XL orange: 1 > Konqi t-shirts (white): > 2XL: 1 > L 1 > M: 1 > KDE Logo t-shirts (white): > XL: 1 > L: 1 > > We took over 300euro on the Saturday which Jose took home. > Sunday we ended up with over 320euro which Jose also took along with the > sales figures. > > Jose can you post the sales figures here and confirm the amount you're > transferring to e.v.? Sunday sales: Konqi t-shirts: - 2XL: 3 K-Logo T-Shirts: - M: 1 - L: 3 - XL: 2 Knitted Konquis: 5 KDE India: 1 orange XL There might be some sales (prosibily the last minute sales) which had not been written as the total ammount in the cash box was higher, so over the next few days I'll count how many are there remaining and send an email with the quantities. The quantity on Sunday (including the contribution made by Adriaan) was 350€, so I'll transfer 650€. A few comments about the t-shirt sales: - As Jonathan said, KDE-India t-shirts are very popular and it might be a good idea to make more. It was also suggested to make them in more colors. - Konqi t-shirts were more popular than the K-Logo ones, more people would have bought them should we had more L and XL units. ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] FOSDEM wrapup
Hi, thanks to all of you who organized the booth. Special thanks to Jonathan for organizing the dinner on Saturday. I really liked. Best Regards On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 10:45 PM, Clemens Toennies wrote: > Am 03.02.2016 um 22:13 schrieb Rohan Garg: >> >> Hey >>> >>> The Frameworks leaflets were really useful to hand out as a means of >>> explaining >>> "these are libraries that everyone can use in their Qt applications". >>> >> While the leaflets are awesome, one of the most obvious questions I >> got asked, which was not covered in the leaflet, was, "How do I >> get/install these frameworks" >> >> IMHO ideally the next set of leaflets about frameworks should include >> a very obvious way of installing Frameworks. >> >>> - major thanks to Rohan and Dave, who seemed to be there all the time >>> and >>> always smiling. >>> >> Thanks :3 >> And a big thank you to you too for helping out :) > > > Thumbs up to all of you! > > Clemens. > > ___ > kde-community mailing list > kde-community@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community -- Agustin Benito (toscalix) KDE eV member Profile: http://es.linkedin.com/in/toscalix ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community