---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/120178/
---
Review request for kdelibs.
Bugs: 337198
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/120182/
---
Review request for kdelibs and David Faure.
Bugs: 336529
El Divendres, 12 de setembre de 2014, a les 22:52:40, Marco Martin va
escriure:
On Tuesday, September 9, 2014, Jan Kundrát j...@flaska.net wrote:
If you would like all plasma to go, just give me a list of repos and I
can make it happen.
No, definitely not yet
In my opinion, the
On Saturday 13 September 2014 16:51:15 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
El Divendres, 12 de setembre de 2014, a les 22:52:40, Marco Martin va
escriure:
On Tuesday, September 9, 2014, Jan Kundrát j...@flaska.net wrote:
If you would like all plasma to go, just give me a list of repos and I
can
Hey all,
I hope this is the right place to ask. I would like to start using
todo.kde.org more. It's imo a good place to track jobs that need to be done. I
did not figure out how to add categories though. Can we somehow give project
admins (see projects.kde.org) the required rights to that
2014-09-13 14:25 GMT-03:00 Milian Wolff m...@milianw.de:
Hey all,
I hope this is the right place to ask. I would like to start using
todo.kde.org more. It's imo a good place to track jobs that need to be done. I
did not figure out how to add categories though. Can we somehow give project
On 13.09.2014 17:49, Martin Gräßlin wrote:
my understanding was that it's still possible to bypass the code review, so I
cannot see that it's against the KDE Manifesto as it's only a kind of social
contract. Or am I missing something.
Personally I like the idea of having the +2 limited to the
On Saturday, 2014-09-13, 17:49:31, Martin Gräßlin wrote:
On Saturday 13 September 2014 16:51:15 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
El Divendres, 12 de setembre de 2014, a les 22:52:40, Marco Martin va
escriure:
On Tuesday, September 9, 2014, Jan Kundrát j...@flaska.net wrote:
If you would
On 13.09.2014 20:21, Ivan Čukić wrote:
I agree, +2 should be retained by the maintainer, or a smaller set of
developers as decided by the maintainer.
Or perhaps it simply turns out that the whole idea of
*having* a '+2' is incompatible with the KDE community
in the first place.
Do we really
On Saturday 13 September 2014 14:38:03 Nicolás Alvarez wrote:
2014-09-13 14:25 GMT-03:00 Milian Wolff m...@milianw.de:
Hey all,
I hope this is the right place to ask. I would like to start using
todo.kde.org more. It's imo a good place to track jobs that need to be
done. I did not
On Saturday, 2014-09-13, 20:38:21, Eike Hein wrote:
These things reinforce each other in multiple ways. If main-
tainers are not entrenched positions, they're easy to replace
when they move on (whether they can accept this themselves or
not). Once you codify them in ACLs (and yes, we do this
2014-09-13 15:57 GMT-03:00 Milian Wolff m...@milianw.de:
On Saturday 13 September 2014 14:38:03 Nicolás Alvarez wrote:
2014-09-13 14:25 GMT-03:00 Milian Wolff m...@milianw.de:
Hey all,
I hope this is the right place to ask. I would like to start using
todo.kde.org more. It's imo a good
On Saturday 13 September 2014 20:38:21 Eike Hein wrote:
The argument but you can still bypass Gerrit and push
directly, this is just social etiquette doesn't matter
because the whole thing is about social etiquette. The
ACLs we already have reflect our social etiquette, and
that means we need
On 13.09.2014 21:10, Kevin Krammer wrote:
So your suggestion would be to not have +2 but a policy of some sort that only
the +1 of the maintainer, if there is an active one, is considered as go
ahead?
Basically my thinking is roughly this: It actually happens
extremely rarely in practice
On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 7:20 AM, Nicolás Alvarez
nicolas.alva...@gmail.com wrote:
2014-09-13 15:57 GMT-03:00 Milian Wolff m...@milianw.de:
On Saturday 13 September 2014 14:38:03 Nicolás Alvarez wrote:
2014-09-13 14:25 GMT-03:00 Milian Wolff m...@milianw.de:
Hey all,
I hope this is the
that needs to be reverted because it's actively objectiona-
ble. As Ivan pointed out, few of us will ever commit any-
thing if we're not confident it would meet with the approval
While I do agree that we have a strange and unreally awesome community that
behaves really well (and I do trust
On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 8:07 AM, Ivan Čukić ivan.cu...@kde.org wrote:
that needs to be reverted because it's actively objectiona-
ble. As Ivan pointed out, few of us will ever commit any-
thing if we're not confident it would meet with the approval
While I do agree that we have a strange and
On Sunday 14 September 2014 08:11:43 Ben Cooksley wrote:
On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 8:07 AM, Ivan Čukić ivan.cu...@kde.org wrote:
that needs to be reverted because it's actively objectiona-
ble. As Ivan pointed out, few of us will ever commit any-
thing if we're not confident it would meet
Everyone with a KDE developer account should in principle have
the right to give a +2. One should only use it when appropriate though, i.e.
when one is the maintainer of a given piece of code or when the patch is
simple enough so that one feels safe to give the other the ship-it.
That's my
On 13.09.2014 22:50, Sven Brauch wrote:
That's my opinion as well. It would be nice to have an explicit way to
differentiate the I think this patch is okay, but I'm not very
familiar with the code you changed (+1) and I'm confident this patch
is fine (+2) cases, and I think everyone with a KDE
On 12 Sep 2014 22:53, Marco Martin notm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, September 9, 2014, Jan Kundrát j...@flaska.net wrote:
If you would like all plasma to go, just give me a list of repos and I
can make it happen.
No, definitely not yet
In my opinion, the purpose of this test is
On Saturday 13 September 2014 23:29:55 David Edmundson wrote:
On 12 Sep 2014 22:53, Marco Martin notm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, September 9, 2014, Jan Kundrát j...@flaska.net wrote:
If you would like all plasma to go, just give me a list of repos and I
can make it happen.
No,
22 matches
Mail list logo
