Re: [kde-community] What is a GitHub pull request exactly?

[Kevin Krammer]

On Saturday, 2015-09-19, 23:06:47, Eike Hein wrote:
> On 09/19/2015 10:32 PM, Kevin Krammer wrote:
> > I don't see there this github review is coming from.
> 
> Review is an interactive process where you ask for changes and
> iterate. Once you open the door to doing it on GitHub, you will:
> 
> * Have a hard time making some contributors understand why
>   they should go through the trouble of moving to Phabricator
>   in the midst of the review process, or next time.
> 
> * Have a hard time making some KDE developers understand why
>   they shouldn't just do it on GitHub.

First, I have no idea where this "use github for review" comes from at all.
Who wants to do that in the first place?

> I don't understand why you expect thinks like "if it matters
> people will take it to RB/Phab as second stage" or "after the
> first patch we ask someone to get an account and switch to
> Phab" will happen as a matter of course.

Because that is how it has always worked until now.

I don't believe that people will start ignoring the need for KDE review 
despite a project's policies, or shoulder patch integration work for new 
contributors indefinitely.

Do you find it likely that a KDE developer who asks an email-patch contributor 
to submit further changes via Phab would not ask a github-patch contributor?

Do you find it likely that a KDE developer who follows the projects guidelines 
on putting patches through Phab would suddenly decide to push directly?

KDE developers who have shown for years that their profressionalism and sense 
of community has made it unnecessary to enforce things like review policies by 
technical means. Who have shown that they prefer new contributors to become 
fully integrated team members?

Because I do not.

I find it way more likely that KDE developers who accept patches from new 
contributors will ask these contributors to get their own developer account 
after a while.
I also find it way more likely that they will continue to abide by the rules 
of the projects they are contributing to.

Cheers,
Kevin

-- 
Kevin Krammer, KDE developer, xdg-utils developer
KDE user support, developer mentoring


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] What is a GitHub pull request exactly?

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2015-09-20, Jaroslaw Staniek  wrote:
> But effectively it won't be reviews because the KDE reviewers won't use it.
> Or do you think we need some dracon law because our community cannot do
> self-control?

I have just been fooled once regarding github and KDE. That makes me not
currently believe in self-control.

/Sune

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] What is a GitHub pull request exactly?

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2015-09-20, Kevin Krammer  wrote:
> First, I have no idea where this "use github for review" comes from at =
> all.
> Who wants to do that in the first place?

The github pull requests comes automatically with review abilities, so
once it is there and one already interacts with github, it is the simple
thing to do.

/Sune

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Help for sprint guidance/organization

[Riccardo Iaconelli]

On Saturday, September 19, 2015 04:17:11 PM Martin Klapetek wrote:
> so I haven't really organized any sprints myself but have participated
> in many, some good, some less good. So here's my personal take
> on this speaking from experience:

Thanks, it was really appreciated!
For those wondering, I am looking exactly for this kind of input! Have you 
ever been to a sprint? What did you like? What did you dislike?

At the end of the sprint, I am willing to put the summary on a wiki page :-)

Thanks,
-Riccardo

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] "Fork Me" button within the kde git infrastructure?

[Jaroslaw Staniek]

On 21 September 2015 at 01:27, Michael Pyne  wrote:
> On Mon, September 21, 2015 00:05:33 Jaroslaw Staniek wrote:
>> PS: Freedom of forking - derivative works is not so terrible, it's a
>> pilliar of FOSS.
>
> Last time I tried it, running git-clone against our KDE git infrastructure
> still worked just fine, and thus forking is quite easy to do. Did this change
> at some point?
>
> I haven't tried running Github's git import tool since it requires an account,
> but even their instructions for manually mirroring a git repo (for use with
> private repos) seem easy enough: 
> https://help.github.com/articles/importing-a-git-repository-using-the-command-line/
>
> Likewise for Bitbucket: 
> https://confluence.atlassian.com/bitbucket/import-code-from-an-existing-project-259358821.html#Importcodefromanexistingproject-PushingaGitproject
>

The thing is: many people here raise concerns that the forking should
happen within the KDE infrastructure.
And I agree. If so, the infra should be accessible read-write for the
3rd-parties.

> No one is arguing to *try* to make it more difficult to fork KDE or create
> derivative works... the "Trinity Desktop Environment" is still up and kicking,
> and others could be too with barely any work at all to setup the initial
> fork...

I see you're not used to the diverse term on github-alike sites:
forking is more like creating a feature branch. The repo is separate
but changes can be merged back (how it's a matter of tool set).

This is the term used on the button.

We're not talking about fork-fork like, say Trinity.

Two ideas to solve the lack of r-w access without github:
- give access to personal repos for with kde identity accounts
(possible DoS attacks or draining resources)
- use gitlab Community edition or other services that offer source code

-- 
regards, Jaroslaw Staniek

KDE:
: A world-wide network of software engineers, artists, writers, translators
: and facilitators committed to Free Software development - http://kde.org
Calligra Suite:
: A graphic art and office suite - http://calligra.org
Kexi:
: A visual database apps builder - http://calligra.org/kexi
Qt Certified Specialist:
: http://www.linkedin.com/in/jstaniek
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] "Fork Me" button within the kde git infrastructure?

[David Narvaez]

On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Jaroslaw Staniek  wrote:
> This is about r-w git repo for KDE and non-KDE devs.
> In git times the need is easier to understand for someone who
> interacts with 3rd party projects at code level.
>
> What is your workflow in this case?
> Do you send git archives git via email or patch sets? And constantly merge?
> I hope you don't use a private git server because it's worse that any
> 'free as beer' git hosting solution because of the bus factor and
> complexity.

I am still not sure I understand what is the use case here: you mean
what do I do when I am working with 3rd party projects and I want to
contribute code to those projects? I usually go visit their web page,
find the "Developers -> How to contribute" page and do whatever they
need me to do provided it is not super complicated.

> PS: Freedom of forking - derivative works is not so terrible, it's a
> pilliar of FOSS.

Github's "forking" was not around when FOSS started, derivative work
is a different thing.

David E. Narvaez
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] "Fork Me" button within the kde git infrastructure?

[Michael Pyne]

On Mon, September 21, 2015 00:05:33 Jaroslaw Staniek wrote:
> PS: Freedom of forking - derivative works is not so terrible, it's a
> pilliar of FOSS.

Last time I tried it, running git-clone against our KDE git infrastructure 
still worked just fine, and thus forking is quite easy to do. Did this change 
at some point?

I haven't tried running Github's git import tool since it requires an account, 
but even their instructions for manually mirroring a git repo (for use with 
private repos) seem easy enough: 
https://help.github.com/articles/importing-a-git-repository-using-the-command-line/

Likewise for Bitbucket: 
https://confluence.atlassian.com/bitbucket/import-code-from-an-existing-project-259358821.html#Importcodefromanexistingproject-PushingaGitproject

No one is arguing to *try* to make it more difficult to fork KDE or create 
derivative works... the "Trinity Desktop Environment" is still up and kicking, 
and others could be too with barely any work at all to setup the initial 
fork...

Regards,
 - Michael Pyne
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] "Fork Me" button within the kde git infrastructure?

[David Narvaez]

On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 7:57 PM, Jaroslaw Staniek  wrote:
> I see you're not used to the diverse term on github-alike sites:
> forking is more like creating a feature branch. The repo is separate
> but changes can be merged back (how it's a matter of tool set).

It is just like feature branches, except every fly-by contributor will
have a clone repo with one patch and that way maintainers will have a
harder time figuring out what's been done where and who's working on
what. If this is the workflow you like, good for you, but I want to
opt-out from this madness and use git as it was meant to be used.

David E. Narvaez
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] What is a GitHub pull request exactly?

[Vishesh Handa]

On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Sune Vuorela  wrote:
> On 2015-09-20, Jaroslaw Staniek  wrote:
>> But effectively it won't be reviews because the KDE reviewers won't use it.
>> Or do you think we need some dracon law because our community cannot do
>> self-control?
>
> I have just been fooled once regarding github and KDE. That makes me not
> currently believe in self-control.

IMHO these kind of statements are not productive in helping us work
together. People can have different opinions and be part of an
organization. Using word such as "been fooled" seems to indicate some
kind of malice intent. If I didn't think this would help KDE I
certainly would not have sent over 30+ emails over the last 2 days.
How about you assume good intentions until proven otherwise?

--
Vishesh Handa
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] What is a GitHub pull request exactly?

[Riccardo Iaconelli]

On Sunday, September 20, 2015 06:39:02 PM Bhushan Shah wrote:
> We don't need to replace Facebook.. tada.
> 
> Facebook is not part of our development nor anything.. So lets not
> compare with facebook.. When we talk about github and do our reviews
> there. It will be recorded there and if github goes down we will loose
> our data. Also in case we need to relicense stuff it would be
> impossible to track down contributor from github.

Facebook *is* part of our development (not code development, promo 
development, but still development it is), and nobody is advocating doing 
reviews on github.

About relicensing, contacting people is really something hard, with or without 
github. With our history of development, we had thousands and thousands of 
contributors of whom we have lost traces, including all the patches via e-mail 
and so on. Our only defense here is having permissive enough licenses (e.g. 
GPLv2+), not counting on our ability to track down developers. Github won't 
make it worse.

Bye,
-Riccardo

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Write our own pull request bot?

[Bhushan Shah]

On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 8:20 PM, Martin Klapetek
 wrote:
>
> Gnome in their years history of github mirroring had 4 pull requests
> (it was mentioned in the other thread...one of the others).

Sorry no [1]

https://github.com/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+org%3Agnome



-- 
Bhushan Shah

http://bhush9.github.io
IRC Nick : bshah on Freenode
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Write our own pull request bot?

[Riccardo Iaconelli]

On Sunday, September 20, 2015 10:50:43 AM Martin Klapetek wrote:
> Gnome in their years history of github mirroring had 4 pull requests
> (it was mentioned in the other thread...one of the others).
> 
> So we might very likely be talking non-issues here anyway.


100% agreed

-Riccardo

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Bikeshedding - our strength apparently *sigh*

[Eike Hein]

On 09/20/2015 01:31 PM, Anne Wilson wrote:
> Hehe! Only on a KDE list could an exhortion to stop bikeshedding become
> the latest bikeshed!

The Debian community is currently having a bikeshed over
whether to call a new community tool Bikeshed. We can't
hope to compete.


> Anne

Cheers,
Eike
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Write our own pull request bot?

[Eike Hein]

On 09/20/2015 02:26 PM, Loïc Grobol wrote:
> Let's try not to be extreme. If someone was able to post a pull
> request, they should be able to switch to Phab if they want to
> participate when notified.

Let's not be naive, either. People are lazy. That's been
one of the arguments for enabling GitHub pull requests.


> I don't follow here. How would making Phab post at Github/retrieve
> GitHub post (if we indeed go this way)
> would lock Phab into anything?

It means you need to convert posts, and you can't convert
what the opposite tool doesn't support. Dropping fidelity
down to crosslinks might be an option though.



Cheers,
Eike
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Write our own pull request bot?

[Loïc Grobol]

On 20 September 2015 at 14:29, Eike Hein  wrote:
> Let's not be naive, either. People are lazy. That's been
> one of the arguments for enabling GitHub pull requests.

IIRC the main argument was not laziness, it was discoverability. But
if we have a nice wiki page to guide people in the switching process,
it should be relatively painless. In any way, we can still try and see
if the issue actually occurs. Granted even before that, we can see if
there is enough pull request attempts to justify writing such a bot.

L

-- 
Loïc Grobol.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Write our own pull request bot?

[Martin Klapetek]

On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Loïc Grobol  wrote:

> Granted even before that, we can see if

there is enough pull request attempts to justify writing such a bot.
>

Gnome in their years history of github mirroring had 4 pull requests
(it was mentioned in the other thread...one of the others).

So we might very likely be talking non-issues here anyway.

Cheers
-- 
Martin Klapetek | KDE Developer
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Write our own pull request bot?

[Martin Klapetek]

On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 10:59 AM, David Edmundson <
da...@davidedmundson.co.uk> wrote:

>
> I said that number but wrt "GTK" not "Gnome"
>

Oops, my apologies then. Somehow I've interchanged them in my memory.

Cheers
-- 
Martin Klapetek | KDE Developer
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Bikeshedding - our strength apparently *sigh*

[Anne Wilson]

On 19/09/2015 15:24, Eike Hein wrote:
> 
> 
> On 09/19/2015 02:12 PM, Myriam Schweingruber wrote:
>> Some of you wanted the mirror on Github because apparently there
>> are developers out there who are too lazy (or too dumb) to learn to
>> use new tools. Are those developers we want?
> 
> Developer recruitment should be our #1 problem for the next two
> years, and along those lines "GitHub might get us contributors" is by
> far the strongest argument that side's come up with.
> 
Hehe! Only on a KDE list could an exhortion to stop bikeshedding become
the latest bikeshed!

Anne
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] What is a GitHub pull request exactly?

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2015-09-20, Riccardo Iaconelli  wrote:
> How exactly have you been fooled?

> Proposal #1 - accepted,

Proposal #1 was a pure mirror. No other services used. Before the
initial mirror was actually completed, the next proposal comes up to
start doing even more github.

> Proposal #2 - up for  discussion.

> "Fooling" would have been Jaroslaw using pull requests (which are 
> open) without asking permission to the whole community first.

Had I imagined that proposal #2 would come immediately, I'd have argued
heavily against proposal #1.

Now I'm heavyl proposing #2, because I expect a proposal #3 to come
after proposal #2 has been accepted but before implemented.


Free software needs free tools.

/Sune

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Write our own pull request bot?

[Loïc Grobol]

On 19 September 2015 at 20:14, Eike Hein  wrote:
> Making the bot post Phab traffic back to GitHub is a
> fix to the notification problem, but doesn't help with
> getting the requestee to participate unless you make a
> full bridge.
Let's try not to be extreme. If someone was able to post a pull
request, they should be able to switch to Phab if they want to
participate when notified.

> And if you make a full bridge, you run into
> problems with things like converting markup or generally
> limiting both review sites to the subset of shared
> functionality. And then we just locked Phabricator into
> only using functionality supported by a proprietary tool
> we can't change, which means we strapped ourselves to the
> non-free tool after all.
I don't follow here. How would making Phab post at Github/retrieve
GitHub post (if we indeed go this way)
would lock Phab into anything?





-- 
Loïc Grobol.
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] What is a GitHub pull request exactly?

[Riccardo Iaconelli]

On Sunday, September 20, 2015 12:26:41 PM Sune Vuorela wrote:
> Free software needs free tools.

I am sorry, but sadly this is not the state of the art. KDE has been created 
with many non free tools and currently co-exists in many non-free 
environments. We can either decide to live with it and improve the situation 
little by little or put our heads in the sand, build walls around us and 
pretend the rest of the world doesn't exist.

Bye,
-Riccardo
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Write our own pull request bot?

[Riccardo Iaconelli]

On Sunday, September 20, 2015 02:39:53 PM Loïc Grobol wrote:
> IIRC the main argument was not laziness, it was discoverability. But
> if we have a nice wiki page to guide people in the switching process,
> it should be relatively painless. In any way, we can still try and see
> if the issue actually occurs. Granted even before that, we can see if
> there is enough pull request attempts to justify writing such a bot.

David already made one, but I think it got lost in the threads...

-Riccardo

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] What is a GitHub pull request exactly?

[Riccardo Iaconelli]

On Sunday, September 20, 2015 01:51:19 PM Laszlo Papp wrote:
> I just do not happen to see this case strong enough to support,
> personally. We have not even tried to see how the mirror works out,
> and we already think of whether or not it is a big problem not
> allowing pull requests, et al. It is a bit fast pace.

Hi,
thank you for voicing your concerns in such a manner, I do not think it is 
harsh at all. :-)

The reason why I am still answering this thread is simply that I would like to 
address the "But what happens if some people do not like the direction of 
github being more than a mirror?" question.

Everybody here agrees that github is just a mirror, and a promotion channel. 
The other issue is how pull requests (aka patch submissions), which cannot be 
disabled anyways, should be answered. There are people who would automatically 
close them with a big NO, and people like me who think this is a communication 
mistake.
Since github is a promo platform, we should be open to people who reach out to 
us, and say something like "thank you for your patch, I have applied it/I have 
put it to review on phabricator/it was automatically put on review on 
phabricator. For next patches, please consider to submit them directly there 
instead of sending us a pull request".

As a second discussion, there is people who found ways to get additional 
funding through 3rd party tools integrated with github. I think that is also 
reasonable (as we cannot provide any alternative), but it is a different point 
indeed.

Bye,
-Riccardo

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Write our own pull request bot?

[Martin Klapetek]

On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 8:29 AM, Eike Hein  wrote:

> On 09/20/2015 02:26 PM, Loïc Grobol wrote:
> > Let's try not to be extreme. If someone was able to post a pull
> > request, they should be able to switch to Phab if they want to
> > participate when notified.
>
> Let's not be naive, either. People are lazy. That's been
> one of the arguments for enabling GitHub pull requests.
>

People are lazy with Reviewboard too. I see no difference in that
really. There are currently about 1200 (!!!) open reviews, some as
old as 2011.

If people want to follow the patch through, they will, if they don't
they won't, no matter the toolset. Reviewboard is a nice example
of that.

Cheers
-- 
Martin Klapetek | KDE Developer
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] A bridge between Phab and Github?

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2015-09-20, Emil Sedgh  wrote:
> What if we create a bot that makes a review request on our internal tool 
> (Phab/Reviewboard) for each Github Pull request and tries to make a 
> bridge between KDE's infrastructure and Github?
>
> A bot that would sync the comments/[commits/diffs] between Phab and Github.

I think Eike already wrote why that was a bad idea.

/Sune

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] What is a GitHub pull request exactly?

[Riccardo Iaconelli]

On Sunday, September 20, 2015 03:01:09 PM Luigi Toscano wrote:
> Riccardo Iaconelli ha scritto:
> > On Sunday, September 20, 2015 12:26:41 PM Sune Vuorela wrote:
> >> Free software needs free tools.
> >
> > I am sorry, but sadly this is not the state of the art. KDE has been
> > created  with many non free tools and currently co-exists in many
> > non-free environments. We can either decide to live with it and improve
> > the situation little by little or put our heads in the sand, build walls
> > around us and pretend the rest of the world doesn't exist.
> 
> But we replaced them as soon as we could.


exactly, as soon as we could.
But not all tools simply are technical alternatives. Can we replace Facebook? 
Sure, we could join Diaspora. But we would be missing out on the community 
already present on Facebook. Reasons for being on github are not technical, 
they are promotional.

Bye,
-Riccardo

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] What is a GitHub pull request exactly?

[Riccardo Iaconelli]

On Sunday, September 20, 2015 03:01:09 PM Luigi Toscano wrote:
> Riccardo Iaconelli ha scritto:
> > On Sunday, September 20, 2015 12:26:41 PM Sune Vuorela wrote:
> >> Free software needs free tools.
> >
> > I am sorry, but sadly this is not the state of the art. KDE has been
> > created  with many non free tools and currently co-exists in many
> > non-free environments. We can either decide to live with it and improve
> > the situation little by little or put our heads in the sand, build walls
> > around us and pretend the rest of the world doesn't exist.
> 
> But we replaced them as soon as we could.

To follow-up on my other reply (sorry for the double post), this is exactly 
where the "little by little" part that I was quoting comes into play.

KDE should step in a more closed environment, and use its weight to show 
people there is a better way to develop software. But in order to do that, it 
must reach out to new channels and new people who are not yet aware.

Bye,
-Riccardo

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Write our own pull request bot?

[David Edmundson]

On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 3:56 PM, Martin Klapetek 
wrote:

> On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Bhushan Shah  wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 8:20 PM, Martin Klapetek
>>  wrote:
>> >
>> > Gnome in their years history of github mirroring had 4 pull requests
>> > (it was mentioned in the other thread...one of the others).
>>
>> Sorry no [1]
>>
>> https://github.com/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+org%3Agnome
>
>
> Cool. I admit I haven't checked, as I said it's a number from
> one of the 300 threads going on.
>
> I said that number but wrt "GTK" not "Gnome"

David
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] What is a GitHub pull request exactly?

[Luigi Toscano]

Riccardo Iaconelli ha scritto:
> On Sunday, September 20, 2015 12:26:41 PM Sune Vuorela wrote:
>> Free software needs free tools.
> 
> I am sorry, but sadly this is not the state of the art. KDE has been created 
> with many non free tools and currently co-exists in many non-free 
> environments. We can either decide to live with it and improve the situation 
> little by little or put our heads in the sand, build walls around us and 
> pretend the rest of the world doesn't exist.

But we replaced them as soon as we could.

Ciao
-- 
Luigi
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] What is a GitHub pull request exactly?

[Bhushan Shah]

On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 6:33 PM, Riccardo Iaconelli  wrote:
> exactly, as soon as we could.
> But not all tools simply are technical alternatives. Can we replace Facebook?
> Sure, we could join Diaspora. But we would be missing out on the community
> already present on Facebook. Reasons for being on github are not technical,
> they are promotional.

We don't need to replace Facebook.. tada.

Facebook is not part of our development nor anything.. So lets not
compare with facebook.. When we talk about github and do our reviews
there. It will be recorded there and if github goes down we will loose
our data. Also in case we need to relicense stuff it would be
impossible to track down contributor from github.

-- 
Bhushan Shah

http://bhush9.github.io
IRC Nick : bshah on Freenode
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Renaming KScreenGenie

[David Jarvie]

Selfie suggests that it would use a webcam to take a picture. A misleading name 
is not a good name IMHO.

On 19 September 2015 20:08:06 BST, Rajeev Bhatta  wrote:
>Selfie is better than Kapture for sure.. :)
>
>On Saturday, September 19, 2015 08:38:41 PM Eike Hein wrote:
>> On 09/19/2015 08:32 PM, Rajeev Bhatta wrote:
>> > If we can choose the name Selfie and then it is important to have
>the
>> > users
>> > relate to it as a product too then it works, if we cannot target
>that then
>> > we should not name it such...
>> 
>> I feel like Selfie is more likely to create an emotional
>> bond than Kapture. That's a gut feeling; it's hard to
>> substantiate.
>> 
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Eike
>
>___
>kde-community mailing list
>kde-community@kde.org
>https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

--
David Jarvie.
KDE developer.
KAlarm author - http://www.astrojar.org.uk/kalarm
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Write our own pull request bot?

[Martin Klapetek]

On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Bhushan Shah  wrote:

> On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 8:20 PM, Martin Klapetek
>  wrote:
> >
> > Gnome in their years history of github mirroring had 4 pull requests
> > (it was mentioned in the other thread...one of the others).
>
> Sorry no [1]
>
> https://github.com/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+org%3Agnome


Cool. I admit I haven't checked, as I said it's a number from
one of the 300 threads going on.

Now we have some idea at least. <400 in a span of 3 years
isn't that much still, especially for a project like Gnome.

Cheers
-- 
Martin Klapetek | KDE Developer
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Write our own pull request bot?

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2015-09-20, Martin Klapetek  wrote:
> Gnome in their years history of github mirroring had 4 pull requests
> (it was mentioned in the other thread...one of the others).
>
> So we might very likely be talking non-issues here anyway.

Gnome is actively advicing against pull requests. In order to get close
to the same numbers, we should also advice against pull requests.

https://wiki.gnome.org/Sysadmin/GitHub

/Sune

___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] A bridge between Phab and Github?

[Martin Klapetek]

On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Sune Vuorela  wrote:

> On 2015-09-20, Emil Sedgh  wrote:
> > What if we create a bot that makes a review request on our internal tool
> > (Phab/Reviewboard) for each Github Pull request and tries to make a
> > bridge between KDE's infrastructure and Github?
> >
> > A bot that would sync the comments/[commits/diffs] between Phab and
> Github.
>
> I think Eike already wrote why that was a bad idea.
>
> /Sune
>

(see my other thread on that, "Write our own pull request bot?")

Cheers
-- 
Martin Klapetek | KDE Developer
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)

[Rajeev Bhatta]

Hi David, 

Nice idea to have a wiki page explaining the process. I was going through the 
text and have some suggestions for some of the text on the wiki page. 

"GitHubMirror
KDE is managing a mirror of projects.kde.org on Github.

We want to make KDE sources easy to find, share and build upon; and most 
importantly we want your contributions to count towards your github profile :)"

GitHub Mirror
"GitHub is a Web-based Git repository hosting service, which offers all of the 
distributed revision control and source code management (SCM) functionality of 
Git as well as adding its own features. Unlike Git, which is strictly a 
command-line tool, GitHub provides a Web-based graphical interface and desktop 
as well as mobile integration. It also provides access control and several 
collaboration features such as bug tracking, feature requests, task management, 
and wikis for every project." ( source. wikipedia ). Github, altough 
proprietary is very popular among different communties and developers. 

We want to make KDE easily available to all so that it is easy to find, share 
and build upon. Therefore KDE is managing a mirror of all its projects, whose 
main location is projects.kde.org, on Github at https://github.com/kde .

The contributions to the KDE project will also count towards your Github 
profile :).

Please let me know if you have any questions/suggestions.

Thanks

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 13:04:55 +0100
David Edmundson  wrote:

> > >
> > > I was under the impression they were disabled by the options we
> > > had selected. Unfortunately that is not the case.
> >
> > Thanks for clarifying on this.
> >
> > I hope they can still be disabled.
> >
> > They can't. I had spent some time looking before. Sorry.
> 
> However, we have solid hard data that it's a non-issue.
> 
> Gnome has been mirrored on github for nearly 2 years, in that time
> GTK has had a grand total of 4 pull requests over time.
> Most others (gedit, cheese, epiphany) have had 0.
> 
> Interestingly they have had literally hundreds of github "forks",
> which implies it has led to sustantiable numbers of patches back
> using the traditional methods
> 
> I've made a wiki page, which says how to turn a pull request into a
> reviewboard submission.
> https://techbase.kde.org/Development/GithubMirror
> 
> If we get any questions we can then just copy and paste that, and
> don't need to spend any time explaining. Bam, done.
> 
> David


-- 
Rajeev Bhatta 
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Official KDE mirror on github

[Valorie Zimmerman]

I went back to the beginning of this discussion, and think a few
issues have been passed over. For instance, this one which has nothing
to do with the Github mirror, and everything to do with improving our
own software / discoverability:

On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 1:10 AM, Jos van den Oever  
wrote:
> On Monday 17 August 2015 09:16:02 Martin Sandsmark wrote:
>> 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.
>
> Agree. This is a good idea regardless of mirroring on GitHub.
>
> A mandatory preamble in the README.md for each KDE project could go something
> like this:
>
> ==
> $name is a [KDE](https://www.kde.org/) project. The source code for $name can
> be found at [$git.kde.org/$name](https://$git.kde.org/$name). KDE welcomes you
> to [join KDE](https://community.kde.org/Get_Involved) and contribute to $name.
> You can report [issues and wishes]($git.kde.org/$name]
> (https://$git.kde.org/$name).
> 
> ==
>
> In this way, even if our repos are not completely indexed, the pagerank will
> increase a lot.
>
>> 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.

Are we doing something like this, now? Can it be done automatically on
*all* our mirrors?

Valorie

-- 
http://about.me/valoriez
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] "Fork Me" button within the kde git infrastructure?

[Jaroslaw Staniek]

On 20 September 2015 at 23:55, David Narvaez  wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Jaroslaw Staniek  wrote:
>> Hi
>> I'd like to ask if this can be technically feasible and something we want:
>
>  
>
> The subject sounds to me like a terrible idea, but reading the IRC log
> I don't think I understand exactly what you are asking for. In
> particular, I don't understand how is this different from a web
> interface for users to submit a fly-by patch and developers to apply
> those patches, which I think is something phabricator would support.

This is about r-w git repo for KDE and non-KDE devs.
In git times the need is easier to understand for someone who
interacts with 3rd party projects at code level.

What is your workflow in this case?
Do you send git archives git via email or patch sets? And constantly merge?
I hope you don't use a private git server because it's worse that any
'free as beer' git hosting solution because of the bus factor and
complexity.

> If you do mean a "Fork Me" button like in github then it must be
> opt-in for project maintainers because I certainly don't want that
> workflow in my project.

The button is mentioned to note that it's possible to implement it the
day when we have the open read-write repos feature (in contrast to
currently 'hidden' behind KDE developer account system).

PS: Freedom of forking - derivative works is not so terrible, it's a
pilliar of FOSS.

-- 
regards, Jaroslaw Staniek

KDE:
: A world-wide network of software engineers, artists, writers, translators
: and facilitators committed to Free Software development - http://kde.org
Calligra Suite:
: A graphic art and office suite - http://calligra.org
Kexi:
: A visual database apps builder - http://calligra.org/kexi
Qt Certified Specialist:
: http://www.linkedin.com/in/jstaniek
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community