Re: More unexpected [k]ubuntu_* stuff in qt repos
On Tuesday 15 December 2015 13:18:57 Jonathan Riddell wrote: [snip] > OK I've set up a clone of Debian's repositories and a hook to tell our > server to pull when changes are made to them. I'll work out how to > change the Plasma mobile images to build from them. Let me know of > any problems. Excellent, thanks a lot! -- All of us have bad luck and good luck. The man who persists through the bad luck - who keeps right on going - is the man who is there when the good luck comes - and is ready to receive it. Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer http://perezmeyer.com.ar/ http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
Re: More unexpected [k]ubuntu_* stuff in qt repos
Rohan has asked me to write down here an opinion I have wrt repos, which might not be clear from my previous mails. I do really prefer to have separate Qt repos for each distribution. I don't really mind if a distribution clones our repos and works from there, but I *do* mind derivatives working in our repos. In my point of view people wanting to change/improve something in Debian should present patches until we know we can trust them to push the commits themselves. Then Rohan asked me a good question: "you'd rather have potentially reusable contributions scattered around in a different repo where you probably won't see them?" The answer is: yes. Like we do with Fedora and Suse and... every other distro. From time to time I check what other distros are shipping and why, just by looking at their repos. If I want a patch of them I clone their repos and get their patch. But this happens not very often: we normally do our best to push stuff directly upstream. Moreover we have a policy of not accepting patches if they have not been ACKed by upstream first, except for very debian-specific ones and some very special cases, like the patch for sni-qt requred in qt4. Sum up to that that we don't have ACLs for allowing specific people to push to specific branches, meaning that anyone who can commit can do it wherever [s]he wants. So, unless convinced otherwise, I'm against sharing repos. -- La mejor prueba de que la navegación en el tiempo no es posible, es el hecho de no haber sido invadidos por masas de turistas provenientes del futuro. Stephen Hawking Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer http://perezmeyer.com.ar/ http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
Re: More unexpected [k]ubuntu_* stuff in qt repos
> Once again I find unexpected [k]ubuntu branchs in qt repos. As I have already > said before: no new branches without consulting first. > Now I see a branch named "kubuntu_vivid_mobile" in qtquickcontrols. I haven't > read someone asking for permission, specially Bhushan Shah (CCing, he asked > permission for KDE stuff and someone got him accepted in the alioth project). > So far I see no benefit in letting third parties accessing our repos, > specially when we have no way of not allowing them to commit to our branches. > Bhushan: I know you are a KDE upstream, but you are not a Qt one. Please > refrain from doing more commits until we sort this out. > If we *really* want to cooperate with Qt packaging we should at very least > define common grounds, which includes no patches for re adding non-DFSG > stuff, > atomic commits with proper changelog entries, no patches non-upstream ACKed > except for very good reasons, etc. I created the kubuntu_vivid_mobile branches. Kubuntu developers have been using Debian pkg-kde git for some years now in an effort to share resources and allow earier cooperation. This was done at the request of Debian pkg-kde as well as Kubuntu developers. It allows for branches to be easily merged and changes to be cherry-picked. In this case it's packaging needed for the phone images http://kubuntu.plasma-mobile.org/ which needs newer versions of Qt on older base systems so it won't be anything that's useful to merge into other branches but its what allows our work to be used in an interesting end product. Can you explain what problems it causes? Kubuntu has very strong politices for upstream patches and free software. I've found myself recently bullied out of Ubuntu for defending its free software policies. If you can point me to any non-DFSG additions I'll be the first to remove them. Jonathan -- http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
Re: More unexpected [k]ubuntu_* stuff in qt repos
On Wednesday 02 December 2015 09:58:39 Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote: [snip] > > Hope that explains my position, Lisandro. Actually I missed a very important point: whoever wants to help in Qt packaging following what we consider our way of working please say so and ping me on IRC. I'll be very happy to do my best to help the interested person to become a normal commiter. -- Los chicos tienen un mayor dominio de la tecnología (y las habilidades y lenguaje que eso implica) que los adultos con los que se relacionan. Por lo general saben más que sus propios padres, sus docentes, sus pediatras, psicólogos, que los políticos y funcionarios de sus comunidades. Eso afectó la autoridad que tenía un adulto para habilitar al mundo. Luis Pescetti http://www.luispescetti.com/regale-su-obra/ Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer http://perezmeyer.com.ar/ http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
