Re: [kde-community] Official KDE mirror on github
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 08:48:15AM +0100, John Layt wrote: > I would note from reading the Gnome wiki on Github that you can't > globally turn off pull requests for an organisation, you need to do it > for each repo. If we set up mirroring I assume we need to write something that automates creating repos on github using the github API, and the API has a function to disable issues. And if I understand the Github API docs correctly it treats issues the same way as pull requests, so if you turn off issues for a project you also disable pull requests. -- Martin Sandsmark ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Official KDE mirror on github
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 12:35:09PM +0530, Bhushan Shah wrote: > In my opinion first two are too wrong arguments to begin with.. If our > repositories can not be found from outside then it requires > improvement from our side. Putting source code on Github is not going > to solve this problem. I don't think improving discoverability of our own infrastructure and putting mirrors of our code on Github are mutually exclusive. I think both will improve our "visibility" so to speak. > Even if people will use github to search projects eventually they will have > to use our infrastructure to contribute. In my opinion all of our projects should have a short description about how and where to send us their patches, even if we don't push things to Github. If we ensure that our git repositories can be found via search engines people still need to know how to contribute. And I think lowering the threshold for people to contribute in general is also something that should be done (and is being worked on already), and is a bit separate from this thing about mirroring stuff on Github. > And about people being surprised that our code is not on Github, it is > really clear that Github is _not_ standard place to get open source > software. We might think so, but I don't think the rest of the world agrees. > So, In short IMO there is nothing wrong with having Github mirror but > that should be read-only and we should have real reason to do it. > Currently sysadmins are reworking our git infrastructure. So lets wait > little bit and see how it goes and then think of this. Yeah, I agree that the reworking of our own infrastructure should be prioritized, and we should disable the pull requests, bug reporting, etc. for everything we put on github. -- Martin Sandsmark ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Official KDE mirror on github
Hi! On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 08:55:57AM +0200, Jos van den Oever wrote: > What part of the KDE infrastructures can be fixed to make the repositories > easier to find? https://quickgit.kde.org/robots.txt https://projects.kde.org/robots.txt I think the reason for this should be pretty obvious; a ton of crawlers indexing everything we have is going to add an immense load, we have a huge amount of projects and source that they'll try to crawl now and then. And part of the reason for this (I think) is that both gitphp and chiliproject aren't the most performant. I don't remember the reason we run gitphp in the first place, but replacing it is not a trivial task in any way, and our sysadmins already have a ton of other work to do. Just guessing, but if we switch to e. g. cgit I think the load should be more realistic to handle (I run cgit on my own server, and it is extremely efficient). So, I think the answer to your question is a) fix or replace our web interface(s) for git, and b) remove the robots.txt. -- Martin Sandsmark ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Official KDE mirror on github
Hi! Just to preface this a bit; I argued pretty vehemently against doing this some time ago on IRC (like, years ago I think), so I hate myself a bit for agreeing with you here. On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 07:46:44AM +0200, Martin Graesslin wrote: > Whether we like it or not, github has become a place to look for free > software > nowadays and if you are not on github your software just doesn't exist. Given > that we can say KDE doesn't produce source code because we are not on github. I still don't like the Github UI personally, and I think the behavior it encourages wrt. pull requests and whatnot is bad, but I agree with you that open source code (whether it is free software isn't important in this context) doesn't really "exist" for a growing amount of developers if it isn't on github. I guess you could say that Github is the biggest marketing platform for open source today. > I suggest that we: > * introduce an official mirror for all KDE repositories on github > * replace all existing (non-official) clones > * disallow pull-requests on github to not replace our development model by a > proprietary platform. I agree with this, and fwiw for the last point I find the way pull requests are done on Github to be bad in general (for once I agree with Linux Torvalds). We also need to ensure that the README files for as many as possible of the projects we push to Github have a short but prominent notice about where and how people can send patches for review. As for some more practical aspects, I think it makes sense to contact this person and ask politely if we could have the name: https://github.com/kde -- Martin Sandsmark ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Jitsi Meet installation for KDE?
On Friday 1. August 2014 14.54.06 David Edmundson wrote: > AFAIK QTox doesn't have group video just 1-1. Hmm, tox.im claims it supports video conferencing, but might be missing in qtox. Anyone want to try? :) -- Martin Sandsmark ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Jitsi Meet installation for KDE?
Hi! On Saturday 5. July 2014 19.06.23 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: > So the question is: Would it make sense for KDE to host our own Jitsi Meet > installation so we can do our video conferences purely on our own > infrastructure? How about using Tox? It has several clients, including native clients for windows, linux, android and os x (with minimal amount of dependencies) and a qt client, and very active community. And audio/video support, of course. Official homepage: http://tox.im/ Native/minimal client: https://github.com/tux3/qTox Qt client: https://github.com/notsecure/uTox Command line client: https://wiki.tox.im/Toxic -- Martin Sandsmark ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Windows licenses
On Wednesday 22. January 2014 07.23.30 Laszlo Papp wrote: > Hmm, actually the generic and basic Windows license does not allow > multiple remote login in my understand onto the same desktop. When I > last checked it required some server license, but I cannot claim it > 100% percents. Yes, but we get server licenses as well? -- Martin Sandsmark ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Plasmoids and Apps - was - Re: Applications in KDE Generation 5
I first wrote a long reply talking crap about UX and regressions, but I re-read it and thought about kittens instead, so I deleted it. On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 07:05:24PM +0100, Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > Agreed, or at the very least has parity. This is all I really want. Don't remove kcalc until the replacement has parity. And thank you for working on this. :-) -- Martin Sandsmark ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Plasmoids and Apps - was - Re: Applications in KDE Generation 5
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 06:42:14PM +0100, Martin Klapetek wrote: > Just for the record, we now have almost 1-to-1 visual consistency of > QtQuickControls with Oxygen style and classic QWidgets with Oxygen style. > Couple patches are still pending. I think the amount of work that has gone into Oxygen for this speaks for itself, though. > The QStyle support in QQC may be a bit hack~ish, but I wouldn't say exactly > poor - in fact, all the default Qt styles work fine with QQC (that includes > Windows and OS X QStyles). Obviously, otherwise QQC could hardly have been released. :-) But not everyone use the default styles that ship with Qt5. Hopefully this will improve, though I'm not very hopeful since people just hack around stuff in the styles themselves. -- Martin Sandsmark ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] QtCurve
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 08:53:34AM -0500, Yichao Yu wrote: > I would like to move QtCurve to the KDE infrastructure Yes! :-D I've been using QtCurve for a while now, and I'd even argue for replacing Oxygen with it for KDE Plasma Desktop Framework Visual Team Studio 5 SC Edition 2014.1, with the right default configuration it would be a refreshing new default style. But I don't have the argument stamina for that. :-P -- Martin Sandsmark ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Plasmoids and Apps - was - Re: Applications in KDE Generation 5
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 11:10:06AM +0100, Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > namely duplication of effort and inconsistency due to multiple > implementations of what is from a use case perspective the same thing. This would be all well and good if it wasn't for the gross regressions it would suffer. You argued the exact same thing for the screen locker. But what you're arguing is a kind of false dichtomy. You would think that instead of two half-assed solutions we would get a single superior implementation, but instead we get a single inferior one. > For things like kcalc, the things the desktop components are not good at are > irrelevant; the things it *is* good at could radically improve its UI. The thing I'm unable to discern is how it would radically improve its UI. The current kcalc UI is very good, I often use it for stuff like bit fiddling, etc. I can't say the same thing for the calculator plasma applet. But please feel free to prove me wrong and make the plasma calculator much better than kcalc. But I'd argue very strongly to not replace kcalc until the replacement is visibly better. The obvious downsides things being replaced would suffer from, thanks to the immature state of the desktop components, and not including the previously mentioned obviously broken components; dreadful performance, no proper accelerator management, no form layouts, and poor QStyle support (both Oxygen and QtCurve has worked around some of them now, though, but I doubt it will be good for a long, long while). And I'm not alone in believing this (others have used the desktop components more than me), but I don't want to drag others into this discussion. -- Maritn Sandsmark ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Plasmoids and Apps - was - Re: Applications in KDE Generation 5
On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 11:55:13AM +0100, Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > this is not really related at all, and i hesitate to engage in the topic here > due to loss of topical focus. It was merely to illustrate a point, that switching to QML is not a simple process, and it seemingly takes us over a year (at the very least, since we still aren't close) to reach feature parity with the old solution. Therefore I think it's useless to move existing, nicely working applications (like kcalc) to it for seemingly no good reason at all. > have you worked with the Qt5 QML2 desktop components? Yes, I've been playing with the desktop components in Qt 5.2. Hopefully they will get a lot better before we release anything using them, though, because things like the file/folder selector is basically unusable in the current state, at least on the systems I've tested it on. -- Martin Sandsmark ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Plasmoids and Apps - was - Re: Applications in KDE Generation 5
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 10:43:42AM +0100, Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > We’ve had plasma-windows for ages now which runs plasmoids in their own > independent window like a mini application. For apps like ksnapshot and kcalc > the results would be identical or nearly so (kcalc would require support for > putting a menu[bar] somewhere, or reorganizing how those particular features > are presented). How would they look and feel? I'm not overly fond of the way widgets in plasma look (and if I had Eike's super vision I could probably point out what's wrong and fix it, probably something with the alignments and gradients), and they don't follow my normal widget styling. On a related note, the new plasma based lockscreen is still not up to par with the old non-plasma one (keyboard focus is still flaky I just noticed again, for one, and widget styles that try to draw a background needs to add a hack). So I think it's a bit naïve to think that it will be an easy task to make stand-alone plasmoids that can replace the normal applications. So while I don't really see the reasons for replacing applications like KCalc with stand-alone plasmoids, I see a couple of reasons not to. -- Martin Sandsmark ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
