[kde-community] Why were there no talks about Ubuntu Mobile at Akademy?

Tue Aug 20 21:59:24 BST 2013

On Tuesday 20 August 2013 22:33:05 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> El Dimarts, 20 d'agost de 2013, a les 22:11:04, Jos Poortvliet va escriure:
> > On Friday 16 August 2013 10:49:26 Jos Poortvliet wrote:
> > > On Thursday 15 August 2013 13:37:56 Jos Poortvliet wrote:
> > > > Heya,
> > > > 
> > > > See the subject - I don't understand why, if Ubuntu wants people to
> > > > develop apps for their Qt/QML based Phone OS (and perhaps, later,
> > > > desktop), they were not at Akademy? Not as sponsors, not with a booth,
> > > > not with talks and sessions... Or were they and I just didn't notice
> > > > them?
> > > > 
> > > > They DID know that the single largest bunch of qualified Qt/QML
> > > > developers was having a meeting in Spain, did they?
> > > 
> > > So, from the replies I summarize:
> > > - There were developers and talks, just a bit under the radar. A honest
> > > miscalculation of what Akademy is for*
> > > - Our marketing efforts of "KDE is people" has backfired, Canonical now
> > > thinks KDE = Aaron and Aaron = KDE ;-)
> > > 
> > > So, how do we fix this? Again, from the perspective of "all
> > > Linux-on-smartphone efforts should be as successful as possible" and (an
> > > admittedly personal belief) "collaboration works better", we should try
> > > to
> > > work with them.
> > > 
> > > What would work best? I'm guessing Albert and Michael have been doing
> > > their
> > > best to explain that we'd love to collaborate so I think we should ask
> > > them
> > > - how can we help you guys?
> > > 
> > > Speaking for myself (as just a promo dude) I will do what I can: if
> > > there's
> > > anything KDE related to an Ubuntu Phone announcement, I will be more
> > > than
> > > happy to help promote it over KDE channels; and I'd be happy to (help)
> > > write something about KDE tech on the Ubuntu Phone to give some
> > > attention
> > > to the fund raising efforts from Canonical. Also, I could suggest a
> > > "Ubuntu Phone developers guide for KDE developers" but that'd require
> > > help from a technical person.
> > > 
> > > Obviously I'd be willing to help the collaboration in other areas as
> > > well,
> > > wherever and however I can.
> > > 
> > > I think Aaron already made clear that he would be happy to work on
> > > sharing
> > > as much as possible with the Plasma efforts he's involved in and kick
> > > folk
> > > around him to do the same. I just make the wild bet that the Frameworks
> > > folk are perfectly open to the same - standards benefit us all, so does
> > > sharing libraries. They are turning KDE Libraries into components which
> > > are
> > > separately useful, that sounds like a terribly useful think for Ubuntu
> > > Phone.
> > 
> > So I get plenty of replies in no time all over that I'm wrong, but when I
> > offer help and ask how we can actually do something constructive, there's
> > only silence? If the Canonical folks on this list don't feel like this
> > mail
> > was directed at them - you're hereby corrected. If you don't feel like
> > there is anything you can do, please say so, we can then discuss trying to
> > talk to somebody at Canonical directly.
> 
> I did not read your email as a question but as a statement, hence my non
> answer, but if you want one from me, here's my take.

Thanks.

> Yes, KDE Frameworks is very interesting. But it's still not done and
> Canonical is going to ship a version of the Ubuntu Touch software by
> october, so it's just not aligned in time properly.
> 
> Same applies for [almost] every other tech we have in KDE, it's either qt4
> only or qt4+qt5 with the qt5 version being alpha/beta.
> 
> This makes it very hard for Canonical to use any of those technologies since
> the Ubuntu Touch platform is Qt5 based.
> 
> So basically answering your "how can we help you guys?" question, I think
> the first step is having stuff Canonical can use. After this happens,
> you/we/someone can start "selling stuff".
> 
> Of course you can argue that Canonical could help in the development of
> those Qt5 ports, but as I said, there's a release to be done in October so
> doesn't make much sense to focus on things that are not release critical.

Even then, I believe it's our job to finish that, they're a company, not a 
charity.

What I was wondering, however is if there are not parts of what we are 
developing in Frameworks which are now also written by Canonical because they 
need the exact same thing for Ubuntu Touch? If so, there might be room for 
collaboration there? Or is that very unlikely/crazy/etc? Even 80% done code 
from us should save them work...

And obviously, AFTER the release, there will be a new deadline for Canonical. 
So that's not really a reason to not collaborate - otherwise, there would 
never be a chance to work together. Again, I'm looking for synergy or even 
just them taking code from us without giving back - that already feels better 
than them writing the same stuff we do. And I'd like to know how and where we 
can work together in the future, and how to start that discussion...

/J

> Cheers,
>   Albert
> 
> > /J
> > 
> > > Cheers,
> > > Jos
> > > 
> > > 
> > > * that would be to let everybody in the KDE ecosystem meet and
> > > collaborate
> > > - and anybody who could use KDE tech or would want to somehow work with
> > > KDE folk can and should be as vocal as possible about that at Akademy!
> > > Community is about building mutually beneficial relationships. If it is
> > > all about giving or taking, it doesn't work for one of the parties and
> > > makes no sense. We're all adult enough to understand companies have
> > > their
> > > needs and goals and we can deal with that. We do with Jolla and
> > > Blackberry and Digia and KDAB and ICS, why not Canonical?
> > > 
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Jos
> 
> _______________________________________________
> kde-community mailing list
> kde-community at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-community/attachments/20130820/3617ffbe/attachment.sig>