Il giorno Tue, 04 Jul 2017 23:04:08 +0200
Christian Mollekopf
ha scritto:
> * it should be ok to release from playground for years, or even
> potentially forever.
That would impact translations, and IMO it can be easily abused as a
"get out of jail free" card that avoids kdereview.
While I unde
I'm just going to reply to luigis mail since the others make similar
arguments.
On Wed, Jul 5, 2017, at 12:16 AM, Luigi Toscano wrote:
> Christian Mollekopf ha scritto:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017, at 11:16 PM, Luigi Toscano wrote:
> >> Christian Mollekopf ha scritto:
> >>> On Tue, Jul 4, 20
Christian Mollekopf ha scritto:
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017, at 11:16 PM, Luigi Toscano wrote:
>> Christian Mollekopf ha scritto:
>>> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017, at 01:20 PM, Jonathan Riddell wrote:
The applications lifecycle policy needs an update
Is this a good current state of it or are
On Tuesday 04 July 2017 23:34:20 Christian Mollekopf wrote:
> What I meant to propose was more that instead of being initially in a
> temporary location,
> and then having to choose one of "proper" ones and go through review,
> we would instead
> start with a permanent location and then you "could"
On Tue, Jul 4, 2017, at 11:16 PM, Luigi Toscano wrote:
> Christian Mollekopf ha scritto:
> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017, at 01:20 PM, Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> >> The applications lifecycle policy needs an update
> >>
> >> Is this a good current state of it or are there more stages?
> >>
> >> https://co
El dimarts, 4 de juliol de 2017, a les 23:04:08 CEST, Christian Mollekopf va
escriure:
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017, at 01:20 PM, Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> > The applications lifecycle policy needs an update
> >
> > Is this a good current state of it or are there more stages?
> >
> > https://community.
On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 9:04 AM, Christian Mollekopf
wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017, at 01:20 PM, Jonathan Riddell wrote:
>> The applications lifecycle policy needs an update
>>
>> Is this a good current state of it or are there more stages?
>>
>> https://community.kde.org/Policies/Application_Lifecy
Hey,
On Sun, Jul 2, 2017, at 03:43 AM, Kevin Ottens wrote:
>
> I hope for another fate. Because of that, I don't think this is a proper
> conclusion to the Evolving KDE effort or a proper answer to Paul's talk.
While I think I understand what you're looking for and don't find (yet)
in the visio
Christian Mollekopf ha scritto:
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017, at 01:20 PM, Jonathan Riddell wrote:
>> The applications lifecycle policy needs an update
>>
>> Is this a good current state of it or are there more stages?
>>
>> https://community.kde.org/Policies/Application_Lifecycle/Draft
>>
>
> Looks good
On Tue, Jul 4, 2017, at 01:20 PM, Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> The applications lifecycle policy needs an update
>
> Is this a good current state of it or are there more stages?
>
> https://community.kde.org/Policies/Application_Lifecycle/Draft
>
Looks good to me for what it currently is.
In gene
On 2017 M07 2, Sun 03:43:57 CEST Kevin Ottens wrote:
...
> In my opinion our answer to "where we want to go" was supposed to be
> something else than "nowhere in particular". Then I think we're falling
> very short on that. We face a problem, and instead of putting our efforts
> to find where to go
On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 01:43:32PM +0200, Kevin Ottens wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tuesday, 4 July 2017 13:20:43 CEST Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> > The applications lifecycle policy needs an update
> >
> > Is this a good current state of it or are there more stages?
> >
> > https://community.kde.org/Po
On Tuesday, 4 July 2017 14:27:07 CEST Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 02:24:30PM +0200, Luigi Toscano wrote:
> > Are we focusing on the graph for now, and then we can move to the content
> > of the page, or can we start the general discussion as well?
>
> Go wild :)
>
I think t
On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 02:24:30PM +0200, Luigi Toscano wrote:
> Are we focusing on the graph for now, and then we can move to the content of
> the page, or can we start the general discussion as well?
Go wild :)
Jonathan
On Tuesday, 4 July 2017 13:20:43 CEST Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> The applications lifecycle policy needs an update
>
> Is this a good current state of it or are there more stages?
>
> https://community.kde.org/Policies/Application_Lifecycle/Draft
Are we focusing on the graph for now, and then we
On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 1:43 PM, Kevin Ottens wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tuesday, 4 July 2017 13:20:43 CEST Jonathan Riddell wrote:
>> The applications lifecycle policy needs an update
>>
>> Is this a good current state of it or are there more stages?
>>
>> https://community.kde.org/Policies/Applicatio
Hello,
On Tuesday, 4 July 2017 13:20:43 CEST Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> The applications lifecycle policy needs an update
>
> Is this a good current state of it or are there more stages?
>
> https://community.kde.org/Policies/Application_Lifecycle/Draft
Didn't we have cases of applications movin
The applications lifecycle policy needs an update
Is this a good current state of it or are there more stages?
https://community.kde.org/Policies/Application_Lifecycle/Draft
Jonathan
18 matches
Mail list logo
