Re: On the reappointment of Richard Stallman as a director of the FSF
Hi Aleix, On 3/24/21 11:26 PM, Aleix Pol wrote: We have tried to sum up our thoughts in the following announcement with the hope to foster collectively the Free Software leadership we need. https://ev.kde.org/2021/03/24/on-the-reappointment-of-rms-fsf/ good work, this is a much more appropriate way to voice the concerns of the KDE community than the kindergarten ad-hominem screaming style of the open letter discussed before. It also addresses a matter that is objectively a concern, and maybe even relevant to us, which is how the FSF elects its board. That the directors themselves can elect new board members seems kind of undemocratic. In contrast, engaging with a mud-fight about who said what mean thing about which marginalized group is something that is highly polarizing, happens way too much these days, and often leads to division, anger and fear instead of improving things. I don't intend to defend Stallman in any way -- I'm merely saying, publicly debating his personality isn't going to achieve much good, and I'm supportive of KDE choosing not to be part of that. Best, Sven
Re: Qt, Open Source and corona
On Tuesday, 14 April 2020 06:01:47 CEST Nicolás Alvarez wrote: > I agree it's possible that "we're thinking about restricting ALL Qt > releases to paid license holders for the first 12 months" was just to > force our hand and make us give them other concessions, and that > they're not actually planning to do it. > > But that's what the fork discussion is about. As Nate said, "we are > thinking of forking Qt" and having credible ability to do so, might > force *their* hand and make them take a step back. If then > negotiations go well, we don't need to actually fork. *Worst* case, > negotiations don't go well, and we have a head start on the forking > work. I completely agree with this. Both "we will restrict releases for 12 months" and "we will fork Qt" are terrible decisions. But, I am in fact convinced that a potential KDE/KDAB/...-backed fork would quickly gain a *lot* of users and also contributors. I expect TQtC knows this as well. Planning how this fork could work out and saying "ok, if you do this, we do that" puts us in a position of power in this conflict, which makes it an important thing to do. Best, Sven
Re: FSF leadership
Hi, yes, what Christian says is a maybe more elaborate phrasing of what I also wanted to say. Greetings! On 9/19/19 10:31 AM, Christian Loosli wrote: Hi all, I mostly agree with Agustin and Jens: I think that people should be elected into positions based on their suitability for that position, which means that things like sex, gender, race, cultural background, sexual orientation etc. pp. should neither be an advantage nor a disadvantage. Otherwise people with backward mindsets thinking that "$xy can't do $z" will go "Oh, you only got into position $z due to being $xy", which doesn't help. Also worst case, but exaggerated, if indeed people are picked not based on suitability, you could e.g. pick someone for a communicative job that is rather introvert or someone for a finance job that doesn't like numbers, then people with the above mentioned mindset would feel that their odd views are even more confirmed, that $xy can't do $z. From a personal point of view, I e.g. do not think that someone from the LGBTQ+ spectrum would represent me any better on a board. What is important to me is that I feel welcome and an not harassed / discriminated due to that. And that is what we need to achieve: our community needs to be inclusive and welcoming, so we shall not tolerate discrimination based on sex, gender, cultural heritage etc. pp. When we have a diverse base, chances are obviously high that people elected into positions have all kind of different backgrounds. And that is what I think we need to recommend to other communities, so that FOSS as a whole is a place where everybody feels welcome and nobody suffers from discrimination based on who they are. On the other hand, I do not feel that we are in the position to make strong pushs or even build up public pressure when it comes to elections and choices of other organizations. I don't know how FSF elections internally work, but if we map it to KDE, I'd see it as very awkward if an external organization would interfere with our board elections and say "You should pick candidate $x or you must add candidates $y and $z". tl;dr: I think we need to ensure that both we and FOSS has a diverse, broad base and work on issues preventing that, not interfering with other organizations elections and processes. Kind regards, Christian Am Donnerstag, 19. September 2019, 04:59:09 CEST schrieb Valorie Zimmerman: As many of you know, Richard Stallman has stepped down from the FSF. However, his supporters on the FSF Board remain. The FSF is on our Advisory Board, according to https://ev.kde.org/advisoryboard.php Accordingly, I would like us (the KDE Community) to advise them to diversify their Board, as RedHat has done here: https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/open-letter-free-software-foundation-board-di rectors. If we cannot do this as a community, I would like to ask the Board to do this on our behalf. All the best, Valorie
Re: Invent/gitlab, issues and bugzilla
Hi, On 7/4/19 5:43 PM, Boudewijn Rempt wrote: > Sorry, but I don't see any way this is going to end well. KDE > projects should not use the gitlab issues feature for bug reports. > Use of the issues feature should be reserved for replacing the > phabricator tasks functionality. KDE should continue to use > bugzilla. I don't currently use the KDE tracker much, but I have to agree Boud and Christoph here. We currently use the Gitlab tracker at work, for a quite small project, and it doesn't even really scale to that. I think for a free-time kind of project one person does with 200 users and 15 issues reported over 2 years it's fine, but to me that seems to be the use case it targets. Two bugtracking systems are also a bad idea; a lot of reports are assigned to the wrong project, because the user (or any utility) often cannot know what the correct component is. Also, often one wants to search for e.g. parts of a trace across projects, or similar things. Best, Sven
Re: social-media list
Hi, On 11/2/18 4:10 PM, Jonathan Riddell wrote: Shrug, nobody on the promo team is on the list or knows what it is for or who is on the list or who runs it. We don't use it. We've put a lot of effort into reverting promo back to a community team after some still anonymous group decided it, alone in all of KDE, could not be run in a community process. We can only hope the same problem does not get caused in other KDE teams. This is a final bit of tidying up to make the infrastructure reflect how it works. Would you mind not sending an email with these contents every second day to some list? It gets a bit old even for me as an uninvolved bystander. I think everyone has understood by now that you did not like something about how this event you seemed to be super upset about a while ago happened, and you are not making anything better for anyone by being sending grumpy emails about it for three more months. Let's instead try to do something constructive. Thanks. Best, Sven
Re: Improving our integration with KDE application teams, and supporting companies
On Monday, 20 August 2018 18:41:31 CEST Sune Vuorela wrote: > 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. Well, you could let the membership vote whether they trust an applicant, for instance. Or let the board decide about this, which was elected by the membership. It will be like this anyways: The e.V. as a fact has some money, and the e.V. has to decide somehow what to spend it on. If you don't trust anyone to make a decision what to do with the money, you will end up doing nothing with it, which is probably very close to the worst possible outcome. Being overly cautious usually doesn't lose, but it pretty much never wins either. Best, Sven signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Twitter access
Hi, On Thursday, 19 July 2018 14:25:41 CEST Jonathan Riddell wrote: > But > I have access to KDE social media and have done since we started > having any. But for some reason I am being blocked from this one > account. Nobody has yet said who by or why. It's illogical, > humiliating and despiriting. I think this is a feeling constructed from the simple coincidence that nobody has found out who is actually capable of giving you access to that account yet, so let's maybe tune down the whole discussion one level, please? I'm sure all is meant well by everyone and there is not really anything adverse going on here. Thank you, Sven signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: KDE Community Goals: 2017 voting has started
On 06/11/17 17:31, Aleix Pol wrote: > You need to drag from the left to the right and make sure that the > list, when it's on the right, it's in your order or preference. I perceived this with left and right being swapped. :D signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [kde-community] Please participate in our survey for input on KDE's Mission
On 28/06/16 23:16, Thomas Pfeiffer wrote: > It looks like especially WikiToLearn, but also Applications are a bit > underrepresented compared to how many people are contributing to them overall. > > I'm now also sending this to the wikitolearn mailing list (yes, I should have > done that before) and hope that we'll get more community members to > participate > in the survey, especially (but not only) applications and WtL contributors. Not exactly what a statistican would call a "randomly sampled poll" though. ;) I trust you are aware of the biasing the amount of participants from the different areas introduces and aim to provide the results of the poll in a form which is transparent with respect to this bias. Greetings, Sven signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
