Re: Proposal unify back our release schedules

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2024-04-19, Carl Schwan  wrote:
> Hello Community,
>
> I know this might be a controversial idea, but I would like to propose reunify
> our release schedules. I feel like splitting our releases schedules between
> Frameworks, Plasma and Gear is not working as well as we intended it to be 
> when
> we split the releases schedules for Plasma 5. This is for multiple reasons:
>
> * We end up with 3 different products which are released at different times 
> but
>   are connected together. Apps and Plasma both need Framework, Plasma needs 
> some
>   packages from gear like kio-extra, Gear needs some package from Plasma like
>   Breeze. Coordinating all these inter-groups dependencies is complex and was 
> one
>   the reason we had to do a megarelease for Plasma 6. Also for the end user, 
> one
>   product is a lot easier to understand.

It might make sense for plasma and gear to follow the same schedule. But
I really like what we have going with frameworks.

One issue that leads to the 'frameworks stable, release monthly' was
that sometimes, even often, you need to add a *feature* to a framework
to address a *bug* in an application.

If you can't relatively quickly start requiring the fixed framework, you
end up working around it in the application and forget fixing it in the
framework.

I do think that that has been a great success with the frameworks
release schedule.

I don't think we should move away from that.

/Sune

Re: [discussion] archiving and retiring the Dot

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2023-10-02, Joseph P. De Veaugh-Geiss  wrote:
> In this context, a radical idea came up: perhaps we can archive and 
> retire the Dot altogether.

I'd like to come up with an alternative proposal:

Make the dot more used:
 - Make it easier to submit articles there
 - Retire all project blogs in favour of the dot
 - Make planet only for personal blogs

Isn't most "project blogs" workarounds to having it hard to have news
items about the projects posted in the right place (the dot)

All project blogs are kind of statements and news from the project as
opposed to statements from individuals.

Some examples:
 "App is now eco certified" => dot
 "How I reduced power consumption of app" => blog/planet
 "Akademy 2031 is hosted on Mars" => dot
 "At akademy, I found this place serving authentic filled-crust italian
 pizza" => dot

And that would also leave better room for posts I would love to see on
the planet by KDE contributors:
 "I taught my 5-year old to control a plane"
 "I reordered my bookshelf by height. This is why"
 "I tried vegetarian cooking; this recipe is amazing"
 "Please remember to vote in the upcoming election in my home country"

For me, dot is about project news; planet is about the life of the
contributors to the community.

/Sune

Re: using gitlab ultimate

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2023-08-02, Harald Sitter  wrote:
> I don't think so

As such, I have a hard time seeing that these mentioned features is
important enough to give in on what I feel are our principles of a
organization doing free software.

I have a hard time finding any featureset where it would be important
enough.

/Sune

Re: using gitlab ultimate

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2023-08-02, Harald Sitter  wrote:
> Ahoy!
>
> How about we start using the gitlab ultimate rather than the free version?

Is it free software ?

https://mako.cc/writing/hill-free_tools.html

/Sune

Re: planet forwarding to discuss?

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2023-06-21, Harald Sitter  wrote:
> may be of interest
> https://discuss.kde.org/t/post-planet-kde-org-blogs-on-discuss-automatically/2287/1

I kind of want comments to my blog post as comments on my blog post, not
in all sorts of other forums.

/Sune

Re: Inactive mailing lists

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2023-04-30, Joseph P. De Veaugh-Geiss  wrote:
[Low traffic lists with relevant subscribers]
> In my opinion moving discussions to more active channels like Matrix or 
> Discuss may increase visibility of the topics discussed and encourage 
> participation from the larger community. Such migrations are likely 
> already happening, organically.

One thing to be very aware of though is that it might separate the
people who has the answers (the current subscribed people) with the
people who has the questions (the people we now redirect elsewhere)

Unless we can get the current subscribed people to also move to the new
platform, this might not be a good idea.

Also, being subscribed to a low traffic email list is rarely something
people actually notice, so the people is likely to stay around for a
longer time. The UI of mail clients and subscriptions rarely get in the
way for that.

The ui of e.g. Matrix very much gets in the way of staying in 200 low
traffic channels.

/Sune

Re: Gitlab update, 2FA now mandatory

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2022-10-23, Ben Cooksley  wrote:
> (such as a Yubikey) or TOTP (using the app of choice on your phone)

There seems to be some questions about what possible "app of choice" is
available.

kde has keysmith
f-droid have freeotp+
sailfish has sailotp somewhere

In the less privacy oriented ecosphere, but should not actually use this
data for their nefarious purposes, 
 - microsoft has a authenticator
 - google has a authenticator
 - github has a authenticator

There is probably others in both the google and apple stores and maybe
also other stores.

/Sune

Re: is a BSL licensed service acceptable for sysadminy use cases?

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2021-05-26, Anna “CyberTailor”  wrote:
>> After 36 months, the code becomes Apache-2.0 licensed (the conversion period)
>
> So you can use old sentry versions, which are open source.
>

+1. I think we should support free and open source software.

/Sune

Re: RMS and open letter

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2021-03-24, Jos van den Oever  wrote:
> The GitHub organization that initiated the letter is anonymous:
>https://github.com/rms-open-letter

It might be anonymous in the organization, but the people behind it is
our friends at OSI, our friends in Gnome and our friends in Debian and
some others. It is the first group of people in the actual letter.

And during the last 24 hours, organizations like Gnome Foundation,
Mozilla, Tor Project and X.Org foundation has also signed it as
organizations.

The wording might not be perfect, and the execution also not perfect,
but it still conveys the important thing:

When our idols and leaders fail us, we should stop idolizing them and
let them lead us.

And the path to redemption is not staying low for a year or two hoping
we forget what has happened.

/Sune

Re: RMS and open letter

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2021-03-24, Valorie Zimmerman  wrote:
> Thanks, Carl. I would like to point out that Carl posted his suggestion to
> the individual people on this list. He did not propose that the KDE e.V.
> officially take a stand.

Then I'd like to propose that KDE signs it.

/Sune

Re: BoF Input: Positive Message for SW License Presentation

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2020-09-08, Andreas Cord-Landwehr  wrote:
> **LGPL 3.0**
> For you as a developer
> ... and in return
> - you have to provide explenation how to update the library

In general, I kind of like it. Though this isn't said "strong" enough.
Adding "and must make it technically possible to do so".

Else, my explanation could just be 
"Compile it with gcc 8.3, rebuild the root filesystem and sign it with
my secret key that I won't share"

/Sune

Re: Issues with the issue tracking system

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2019-11-04, Philippe Cloutier  wrote:
> Over the last months, I requested the "severity" (importance) of several 
> tickets to be adjusted:

I'm not sure if you have grown up over time, but I kind of sense the
same attitude from you as back when you were banned from debian bts, as
one of the few persons ever.

I urge you to reconsider your attitude.

/Sune

Re: Anonymous contributions

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2019-04-12, Eike Hein  wrote:
> Pseudonyms don't jive with that for me. Someone not entrusting me with 
> their real name feels regressive vs. our current community standards. 
> It's a bit uncomfortable.

I have kind of the same feeling. Though real name doesn't have to be
legal name. 

But just for reference - this is Debians take on names.
https://lists.debian.org/debian-newmaint/2009/07/msg00044.html

And there are at least a couple of Debian developers who are developers
under a pseudonym.

And then of course the many people who are like called Steve when their
real name is Stephen and such similar things.

/Sune

Re: Licensing policy change proposal

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2019-01-29, Krešimir Čohar  wrote:
> I wouldn't necessarily characterize the Unsplash license as FOSS, but
> rather public domain with restrictions (not entirely public domain). I also

I think this is a problem. Both "not characterize as FOSS", and "with
restrictions". And basically the core of this.

/Sune

Re: Licensing policy change proposal

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2019-01-27, Nicolás Alvarez  wrote:
>
>> On 27 Jan 2019, at 15:04, Krešimir Čohar  wrote:
>> 
>> This email puts forth for your consideration a proposal to change our 
>> current licensing policy to accommodate three more licenses that cover the 
>> new photographic selection of wallpapers in 
>> https://phabricator.kde.org/D18078.
>> 
>> The licenses are:
>> - the Pexels license: https://www.pexels.com/photo-license/
>
> While I *personally* agree with this license, it will be probably considered 
> non-free (because you can't resell the photo alone), in particular by Linux 
> distributions.

I think I agree taht linux distros will want to remove it.

Discriminates against field of endavour

>
>> - the Unsplash license: https://unsplash.com/license, 
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsplash#License
>
> Looks good to me. "The right to compile photos from Unsplash to replicate a 
> similar or competing service" doesn't really affect us when we're using 
> individual photos. I think it doesn't even concern copyright but "database 
> rights". And everything else is basically CC0.

I still need to fully understand what that means.

If I get 5 images from KDE that are under unsplash license, 5 images
from Gnome that are under unsplash license, can I use those in my public
image gallery ?  Depending on this, I think it might fall under the same
non-free category as the Pexels license.

But it feels that this clause should not be a license clause for the
image, but part of the ToS for unsplash API or unsplash site. I guess
someone needs to talk to either the photographers or with unsplash to
figure out what it actually means. Else, I think we should default to
"no".

>> - the Creative Commons Zero License: https://spdx.org/licenses/CC0-1.0.html
>
> CC0 should be uncontroversial, it should be definitely allowed by our license 
> policy.

yeah. at least implicitly.

I don't think we are listing all the possible licenses, just the main
ones. Everything that is one-way compatible with what we request, should
be allowed as such.  


Also note that most distros won't ship these images if there isn't
clarification of the license.

/Sune

Re: Coming to FOSDEM?

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2019-01-10, Adriaan de Groot  wrote:
> It would be nice if the list of people were complete-ish, so we (as a 
> community) know who to look out for and look forward to. If you're available 
> to help at the booth, please say so as well. Jonathan is coordinating things, 

I'll probably be there, but probably not that available to help at the
booth. And is still undecided if KDE or Debian gets to see me for
saturday dinner.

It looks like my tablecloth can stay home for once?

/Sune
 - who hasn't booked a bed nor a transport yet.

Re: Improving Bugzilla Status Names

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2018-09-29, Valorie Zimmerman  wrote:
>> discuss on the appropriateness of REOPENED.
>> I'd rather find an alternative for REPORTED, if this confusion is going to
>>
>
> OPENED ?

RECIEVED ?

though opened might be better.

/Sune

Re: Qt World Summit 2018

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2018-09-04, Eike Hein  wrote:
> In the debrief, I think we were quite happy with how things went and
> concluded if we get another chance, we'd try to do it again. The Qt
> Company feels the same way, as they've reached out and offered similar
> accomodations for this year as well.

I think we should be more clear up front about what exactly the amount
of work for the conference are.

I'm not sure I'll attend again as a KDE person. There was too much being
free worker and too little time to attend the conference part of the
conference.

I do think we should try harder to just be there with a KDE booth and a
4-8 people to man it in alternating schedules, and not do much other
during conference time.

/Sune

Re: Improving our integration with KDE application teams, and supporting companies

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2018-08-24, Cornelius Schumacher  wrote:
> This was a quite complex situation, there were many factors involved. But 
> again the negative feedback was not about the question if it's ok to pay 
> developers but about other aspects of how the project was handled.

And on some of those questions, Frank has later said at public talks
that "KDE was right". (fosdem last year)

/Sune

Re: FOSDEM: call to action!

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2018-08-22, Adriaan de Groot  wrote:
> There's a lot more material about FOSDEM booths than is initially apparent. 
> There have been threads on various lists about merchandise, too: basically it 
> comes down to "print or order stuff locally, get it reimbursed". Just this 
> week at Akademy i gave Sune the blue tablecloth back that we used in 2018 
> (with "KDE" on the front in Frozen(tm) duct tape).

While I haven't yet planned my fosdem weekend, I can bring it along
again if I end up at fosdem in the fosdem weekend.

But a blue piece of cloth also isn't that expensive to source at various
locations.

/Sune

Re: Improving our integration with KDE application teams, and supporting companies

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2018-08-19, Thomas Pfeiffer  wrote:
> Interestingly, in almost all conversations I had at Akademy about this topic, 
> people were actually very positive about the prospect of growing an ecosystem 
> of companies around KDE. Maybe it's the difference between the people who are 
> still active and want to see people spend paid time on KDE, and those who are 
> mostly watching KDE from the sidelines and want to go back to "the good old 
> timeṣ"™ when KDE was just a bunch of enthusiastic geeks who wanted to change 
> the world as a hobby.

I think this is a misinterpretation.

I have not heard a single voice opposing people getting paid for doing
KDE hacking.

I have heard some people arguing that KDE eV shouldn't pay people to
hack on KDE software.

I have still to be convinced that it is a good idea that KDE eV decides
whose work is good enough to qualify for KDE money.

/Sune

Re: List for job offers

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2018-02-19, Boudewijn Rempt  wrote:
> I think it would be a good idea. Also, I don't really see why someone looking 
> for a good Qt developer wouldn't make a beeline for our community :-)
>

I have in the past approached several companies trying to get them to
support KDE e.V, and one of my selling points have been to be "first in
thought" when kde people are looking for jobs.

/Sune

Re: KDE at Qt World Summit 2017 - let's make it the best yet!

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2017-08-08, Eike Hein  wrote:
> Berlin, Germany will once again host a Qt World Summit this year, on
> October 10th through 12th. This follows on from the Qt Contributor
> Summit on October 9th and 10th.
>
> I've stepped up to coordinate KDE's presence at QtWS this year. Sune,
> who has done it in recent years, is a little to busy this year and
> will be number #2.

I'm (obviously) interested.

/Sune

Re: KDE Licensing Policy Updates

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2016-09-20, Jonathan Riddell  wrote:
> Differences:
> Removed
> "code may not be copied from Qt into KDE Platform as Qt is LGPL 2.1"
> Rationale: Qt is now LGPL 3 as well as 2

Qt is not LGPL2.1 in general. As long as we want to be LGPL2.1 compat,
we can't copy code from Qt.

>
> Added:
> ''Applications which are intended to be run on a server'' can be
> licenced under the GNU AGPL 3.0 or later
> Rationale: KDE Store code is under AGPL
> Question: should this be an option or a requirement for server software?

Not a requirement. Just like we don't have copyleft requirements
anywhere.

And it should also be specific to things on a web server.

For example:
An imap AGPLv3 server might be a bad thing - there is a way to notify
the user over teh imap protocol, but it is annoying for users, so it
should really not be used. (It is the way quota messages and similar
normally are sent)

> Added:
> "Content on collaborative edited websites such as wikis must be
> licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 4.0
> International."

Again, I don't think we should force copyleft.

> Changed:
> "Documentation must be licensed under the Creative Commons
> Attribution-Sharealike 4.0 International"

Also here. No need to force copyleft.

> Removed:
> Standalone media files CC 4.. "This does not apply to icons or
> anything which is likely to be mixed with content under our normal
> (GPL etc) licences."
> Rationale: CC 4 is compatible with GPL 3 which is the licence of
> Breeze icons anyway.

I want my icons licensed under the same terms as my application. Even
when my application is more liberal licensed than GPLv3.

/Sune

Re: [kde-community] please explain: Users shouldn't have to buy in into "KDE" from mission ideas

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2016-07-09, sabayon11  wrote:
> Does it mean that I will be able to install Dolphin as stand-alone
> application on other graphic environments like Xfce, Cinammon, i.e.
> without all Plasma dependences like kde-runtime, etc.?

kde-runtime was not a plasma dependency, but an implementation detail of
kdelibs.

> Is it going to be really possible?

On linuxes, it is already possible. Just   dolphin

(Assuming you are running a linux distribution that is slightly newer
than debian stable)

/Sune

___
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 - final version

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2016-03-15, David Jarvie  wrote:
>>> > "A world in which everyone enjoys freedom and privacy and has
>>control
>>> > over their digital life."
>
> "A world in which everyone has control over their digital life and enjoys 
> freedom and privacy."

I've not been able to follow all these discussions (due to busy life). I
did fear a bit what the outcome could have been from these discussions.

But. This is amazing.

Yes. That's exactly why I'm here.

/Sune

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] What is a GitHub pull request exactly?

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2015-09-20, Jaroslaw Staniek  wrote:
> But effectively it won't be reviews because the KDE reviewers won't use it.
> Or do you think we need some dracon law because our community cannot do
> self-control?

I have just been fooled once regarding github and KDE. That makes me not
currently believe in self-control.

/Sune

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] What is a GitHub pull request exactly?

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2015-09-20, Kevin Krammer  wrote:
> First, I have no idea where this "use github for review" comes from at =
> all.
> Who wants to do that in the first place?

The github pull requests comes automatically with review abilities, so
once it is there and one already interacts with github, it is the simple
thing to do.

/Sune

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] What is a GitHub pull request exactly?

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2015-09-20, Riccardo Iaconelli  wrote:
> How exactly have you been fooled?

> Proposal #1 - accepted,

Proposal #1 was a pure mirror. No other services used. Before the
initial mirror was actually completed, the next proposal comes up to
start doing even more github.

> Proposal #2 - up for  discussion.

> "Fooling" would have been Jaroslaw using pull requests (which are 
> open) without asking permission to the whole community first.

Had I imagined that proposal #2 would come immediately, I'd have argued
heavily against proposal #1.

Now I'm heavyl proposing #2, because I expect a proposal #3 to come
after proposal #2 has been accepted but before implemented.


Free software needs free tools.

/Sune

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] A bridge between Phab and Github?

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2015-09-20, Emil Sedgh  wrote:
> What if we create a bot that makes a review request on our internal tool 
> (Phab/Reviewboard) for each Github Pull request and tries to make a 
> bridge between KDE's infrastructure and Github?
>
> A bot that would sync the comments/[commits/diffs] between Phab and Github.

I think Eike already wrote why that was a bad idea.

/Sune

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Write our own pull request bot?

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2015-09-20, Martin Klapetek  wrote:
> Gnome in their years history of github mirroring had 4 pull requests
> (it was mentioned in the other thread...one of the others).
>
> So we might very likely be talking non-issues here anyway.

Gnome is actively advicing against pull requests. In order to get close
to the same numbers, we should also advice against pull requests.

https://wiki.gnome.org/Sysadmin/GitHub

/Sune

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Bikeshedding - our strength apparently *sigh*

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2015-09-19, Kevin Krammer  wrote:
>> No, I'm afraid of code review slowly moving from KDE to github up to =
> the
>> final point where I need to get a github account because otherwise I =
> cannot
>> contribute code.
>
> You mean that a KDE project would ignore your review request it it come=
> s from=20
> reviewboard/phabricator?

Or projects that I care about let's code in that way using that review
mechanism.

/Sune

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Official KDE mirror on github

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2015-09-19, Jaroslaw Staniek  wrote:
>
> Sounds like a bit superficial premature complain. If only we had a flood of
> pull requests...

It is not premature to complain!

I personally feel a bit fucked over right now. All this started with a
KDE github mirror and *just a mirror*. No pull requests. No bugtracker.
No nothing else. Just a mirror. And it was repeatedly said in the thread
that it would be just a mirror. Just a mirror.

The initial mirror sync isn't even done before people come out and say
"Can we enable this". "Can we enable that". Srsly.

I was fearing a slippery slope towards github development model, but we
are sliding faster than my nightmares.

When one is on a slippery slope, it is time to take a firm stand.

/Sune

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Write our own pull request bot?

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2015-09-19, Martin Klapetek  wrote:
> To further expand on the idea, the workflow would be as follows:
>
> * bot looks through our repos
> * bot finds a pull request
> * bot downloads the diff between requested branch and mirror HEAD
> * bot uploads it to phabricator as any other patch
> * bot posts message to github "Thanks for your patch, in KDE we use
> phabricator for reviewing and merging patches, so your pull request was
> posted here . If you want to follow it through, please continue the
> discussion at . Thanks a lot for your contribution!"
> * contributor follows on phabricator

What happens if contributor doesn't follows? How do I as a reviewer know
why the contributor doesn't follow on? How can I reach them?

No. let's just say no to pull requests.

/Sune

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Official KDE mirror on github

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2015-09-18, Jaroslaw Staniek  wrote:
> Don't we slowly drop support for Reviewboard?
> (even I am still not sure how to correctly update phabricator diff
> from command line)

Then notes should be changed when we move from reviewboard to 

> 2. Regarding the issues/pull requests - nobody agreed/disagreed to my 
> proposal.
> Is anyone against an *opt-in* possibility of enabling Issues and/or
> Pull Requests for a given mirrored repo? Opt-in by maintainer of the
> patches. We can easily draft a policy if someone is afraid.

Yes. I'm against. And I'm also against mirroring on github, but I didn't
voice my opinion by that because it was said that issues and pull
requests are not to be enabled.

We should not proprietarize our development workflow. We should not work
towards anything that locks us in anywhere. 

Free software needs free tools.

And the BDSM Free Software Definition:
"I refuse to be bound by software I cannot negotiate with".

/Sune

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] KGpg

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2015-08-30, Jeremy Whiting jpwhit...@kde.org wrote:
 Which aspects of KGpg are nicer to use? Could those same changes come
 to Kleopatra possibly? or is this another Parley vs KWordquiz and we
 should do our best to keep both around?

The key list and coloring is .. nicer.

And Kleopatra tries to unify gpg key handling and s/mime key handling
under one ui, and I don't really think it succeeds in that. It looks
like a s/mime certificate handler that has gotten gpg key grafted upon
it.

/Sune

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

[kde-community] Participate with KDE at Qt World Summit 2015

[Sune Vuorela]

Qt World summit is approaching, and it is likely going to be amazing:

http://www.qtworldsummit.com/ - 5th - 7th October 2015

KDE will be there, with a booth and gaining knowledge and helping the
conference a bit.

We have quite a bit of tickets, so now we just need people. Are you one of
them?

Besides getting to watch a lot of interesting talk content, we need some 
people to man the booth from time to time to mostly talk to Qt users. Few of 
them are current Plasma Desktop users. All of them are potential future KDE 
Framework users. We need to make that happen.

We also need to help a bit at the conference. The last couple of years it has
been session chairing a bit, and moving a stack of chairs.

Note that it is not access to the trainings on monday, but we have a meeting 
room to discuss things and/or hack on stuff.

So. For those who wants to join in, please contact me and I will see to get
the tickets allocated.

/Sune
-- 
I didn’t stop pretending when I became an adult, it’s just that when I was a 
kid I was pretending that I fit into the rules and structures of this world. 
And now that I’m an adult, I pretend that those rules and structures exist.
   - zefrank
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Program to show presenter time remaining countdown for Akademy talks

[Sune Vuorela]

On Friday 26 June 2015 09:18:01 Peter Bouda wrote:
 On the other end of the simple-complex scale I suggest to create an
 Embedded Linux system that boots a QML count down app. I did a similar
 project recently, with touchscreen and WIFI, so it would be a matter of
 writing the QML code. I have a little free time, if that is the way you
 want to go.

So. Whattabout meeting up in #kde-devel this sunday (28th, 10.30am CEST) and 
see what kind of fancy QML / Qt monstrosity we can come up with during the 
following 3-5 hours.

Anyone up for it? QML'ers, c++ coders, people with graphics skills. People who 
just want to learn?  I guess we will just break the thing down into manageable 
pieces when people show up.

Hope to see some people there. 

/Sune
-- 
I didn’t stop pretending when I became an adult, it’s just that when I was a 
kid I was pretending that I fit into the rules and structures of this world. 
And now that I’m an adult, I pretend that those rules and structures exist.
   - zefrank
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Mailing lists with private archives

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2015-04-06, Albert Astals Cid aa...@kde.org wrote:
 Hi, these lists have private archives

  * https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/amarok-bugs-dist
  * https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde
  * https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-announce
  * https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-artists
  * https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-br
  * https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-bugs-dist
  * https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel
  * https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-events-in
  * https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-i18n-el
  * https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-i18n-nl
  * https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-licensing
  * https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-look
  * https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-metrics
  * https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-promo
  * https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-usability
  * https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kfm-devel
  * https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/khtml-cvs
  * https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kopete-devel
  * https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-bugs
  * https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/quanta-devel
  * https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/www-de
  * https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/www-pl

 I'd like to have them back to the default state of public archives.

 Anyone has a special reason for the lists above to not be public?

One reason is likely that we might not actually archive those lists. Or
if we do, it is a recent thing. But I'm sure Ben can enlighten us here.

/Sune

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Fwd: Top 15 Mailinglists with messages in moderation

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2014-09-02, Ben Cooksley bcooks...@kde.org wrote:
 Hi all,

 A number of our mailing lists appear to be being insufficiently moderated.
 Can we please have volunteers for moderating these lists, or
 indications that they can be closed?

 @Board: Please moderate your queue more regularly. Inspection of your
 queue reveals a number of very old messages in there which should be
 dealt with.

 Thanks,
 Ben

 -- Forwarded message --
 Subject: Top 15 Mailinglists with messages in moderation
 To: sysad...@kde.org


 109 kexi
  72 kde-artists
  70 kget
  62 kde-commits
  40 kde-i18n-fry
  33 kde-perl
  33 kde-i18n-pt
  31 kpovmodeler-devel
  24 owncloud
  23 konq-bugs
  19 kde-licensing
I can volunteer to co-moderate kde-licensing
  18 kde-ev-marketing
  17 kbabel
  16 kde-solaris
  16 kde-pr
  15 kompare-devel
  13 kde-l10n-hu
  13 kde-el
  12 kde-extra-gear
  12 kde-bugs-dist
  12 freenx-knx
  11 kde-ev-board
  11 kde-de
  10 kde-networkmanager
   9 kde-webmaster

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Berlin - Brno road trip

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2014-06-18, Patrick Spendrin patrick_spend...@gmx.de wrote:
 I looked at Deutsche Bahn and there is a direct train from Berlin to
 Brno on the 4th (thursday, remember on friday is e.V. GA)
 starting at 12:46
 Dresden at 15:06
 arrival at 20:19

 cost 41,60 EUR p.P.

I might somehow also join in, but don't plan too much until you actually
see me on the station. I might also take the nightrain to prague and
switch there rather than in Berlin. ALl that I need to figure out, some
time in the future.

/Sune

___
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

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2014-02-19, Agustin benito bethencourt aben...@kde.org wrote:
 I must confess though that I am worry about the association between:
 * proprietary platforms = commercial
 * free platforms = non commercial

 that might be implied from this model.

I understood it that it was 'source code is free software and it is
available over there = link'  'My binaries available from over there
= otherlink costs money to be fully used'.

I agree that I might worry about what Augustin is writing. But I have no
issue with people charging for their binary builds of free software,
and I'm pretty sure that others, including RMS, Redhat and others would
be okay for such a business model. (I of course assume that you still
live up to the license)

You can probably also hire half of the people on this list to build
windows installers for you - for a fee.

/Sune

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] KDE Essential Applications - was - Re: Applications in KDE Generation 5

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2014-01-15, Albert Astals Cid aa...@kde.org wrote:
 tarball? An XML file somewhere? Personally I find distros should be smart 
 enough to decide which apps they want to ship by default and which not.

I've actually in my distribution tried to ship stuff, including package
selection, quite close to what is shipped by upstream, even when it not
might be the best final choice for users, *because* that's what KDE is
shipping, so should we.

/Sune

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Proposal: KDE Manifesto wording revision

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2013-11-11, Thomas Zander zan...@kde.org wrote:
 Could you please explain to those that don't immediately spot it how the 
 before and after are functionally different? 

That it opens up for several groups of contributors, KDE contributors and
other people. I do also think that it is important that KDE projects has
KDE contributors as their only citizens, so that there isn't some being
second class citizen.

/Sune

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community