Re: [kde-community] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?

Hey everyone Given the discussion here and the fact that we (again) do not have enough ideas on our ideas page and mentors signed up I suggest the following: * We realize that we're not in a situation where we're fighting for slots at this point. * We let the GSoC admin team decide on a

Re: [kde-community] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?

On Wed, 10 Feb 2016, Vishesh Handa wrote: On Feb 8, 2016 11:51, "Jonathan Riddell" wrote: > > I also heard a suggestion from Vishesh that projects like Amarok > shouldn't be allowed in GSoC because they are not very active.  It > seems nonsense to block projects from having

Re: [kde-community] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?

On Feb 8, 2016 11:51, "Jonathan Riddell" wrote: > > I also heard a suggestion from Vishesh that projects like Amarok > shouldn't be allowed in GSoC because they are not very active. It > seems nonsense to block projects from having activity on grounds that > they are not very

Re: [kde-community] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?

On Monday, February 8, 2016 2:37:26 AM CET Valorie Zimmerman wrote: > As part of the Student Programs admin team, to me it is pretty clear: > we should act as the umbrella for friendly teams who pull their own > weight, whether or not they intend to become KDE projects officially > in the near

Re: [kde-community] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?

I think it's very much in KDE's interest to allow projects which are not part of KDE but which KDE depends upon to be part of it. This should be done on the judgement of the KDE GSoC admins based on value to KDE and how well the other projects works with us. In many cases it's the same people

Re: [kde-community] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?

On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 8:38 AM, Martin Klapetek wrote: > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Ingo Klöcker wrote: >> >> On Wednesday 03 February 2016 14:58:54 Martin Klapetek wrote: >> > So I'd like to have this cleared - does the community agree to >> >

Re: [kde-community] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?

On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Ingo Klöcker wrote: > On Wednesday 03 February 2016 14:58:54 Martin Klapetek wrote: > > So I'd like to have this cleared - does the community agree to > > have non-KDE projects, those that do not follow the Manifesto, > > participate in our GSoC

Re: [kde-community] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?

On Thursday, February 4, 2016 11:53:48 AM CET Ivan Čukić wrote: > > Just FTR, we don't give away our own slots, but we ask for slots after > > we decide how many projects we are going to select. > > And with that I'm completely fine. I just found myself physically shaking my head at some of the

Re: [kde-community] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?

On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 8:42 AM, Teo Mrnjavac wrote: > On Thursday, February 4, 2016 11:53:48 AM CET Ivan Čukić wrote: > > > Just FTR, we don't give away our own slots, but we ask for slots after > > > we decide how many projects we are going to select. > > > > And with that I'm

Re: [kde-community] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?

On woensdag 3 februari 2016 22:28:34 CET Boudewijn Rempt wrote: > I don't even remember what I thought the last couple of times, but I > think it was something like this: > > "if these are projects that we can likely bring under our umbrella, yes, > we should, if that is not going to happen, then

Re: [kde-community] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?

On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 4:08 PM, Ivan Čukić wrote: > I am *very* against giving our slots to non-kde projects. We already > had problems with this a few years ago, I would rather avoid the > unpleasantries that happened back then. Just FTR, we don't give away our own slots,

Re: [kde-community] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?

On Thursday, February 4, 2016 11:38:56 AM CET Ivan Čukić wrote: > > I'm not sure whether it's against the manifesto. Is that really a > > "benefit" > > that we do some admin work for them? One could also see it as an > > I would not be against us being admins of an external project that has > its

Re: [kde-community] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?

> Just FTR, we don't give away our own slots, but we ask for slots after > we decide how many projects we are going to select. And with that I'm completely fine. Cheerio, Ivan -- KDE, ivan.cu...@kde.org, http://cukic.co/ gpg key id: 850B6F76 ___

Re: [kde-community] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?

On Wednesday, February 03, 2016 14:58:54 Martin Klapetek wrote: ... > Imho this goes against the Manifesto as the projects gets to > "enjoy the benefits" without the complying with "commitments" > of the Manifesto. It's also less transparent overall (not able to > monitor progress as it's not on

Re: [kde-community] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?

I don't even remember what I thought the last couple of times, but I think it was something like this: "if these are projects that we can likely bring under our umbrella, yes, we should, if that is not going to happen, then we shouldn't" I cannot imagine I ever thought something different, but

Re: [kde-community] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 2:58:54 PM CET Martin Klapetek wrote: > Hey, > > so in the couple previous years we have collectively and > repeatedly rejected the idea of other projects, that are not > KDE projects by the Manifesto, to participate in KDE GSoC. > Namely we rejected Tupi and

[kde-community] Should we allow non-KDE projects to participate in GSoC under KDE?

Hey, so in the couple previous years we have collectively and repeatedly rejected the idea of other projects, that are not KDE projects by the Manifesto, to participate in KDE GSoC. Namely we rejected Tupi and SubSurface solely because "not a KDE project", GCompris became a KDE project and then