[kde-community] Windows licenses

Laszlo Papp lpapp at kde.org
Sat Jan 25 08:11:33 UTC 2014


Hi Jaroslaw,

On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 10:36 PM, Jaroslaw Staniek <staniek at kde.org> wrote:
>> Unfortunately Stack Overflow and the Windows forum are full of
>> interoperability issues.
>
> Laszlo,
> I have no clear idea what you're talking about.

You answer this concern yourself right in the next sentences here:

> Obviously various compilers are not compatible. And definitely
> debugging formats.

So, yes, in theory, this should work, like so many other things in
life, but the practice shows that this is not the case.

Even with the same compiler type (e.g. msvc) and different versions
there can be many issues. Alternatively, just consider the fact that
even with the same version, but different build types, etc.

I literally spent days and nights to help people with such issues. I
would probably even skip using a shared machine like that because I
would not like to deal with the consequences of it. It is not well
spent of my time in my opinion.

If there is someone standing up all the time instantly on a shared
machine when something like that goes wrong, and hence it can be a
smooth experience for me, I would probably consider it. Although, it
sounds a bit too ideal which, practically speaking, I cannot imagine
to happen.

I am happy to see a few people though for whom it just worked.

>> Sounds good that you had no issues though. I am envy. :-)
>>
>>> For pacman: pacman is as far as I know only part of msys2 , and quite useful
>>> there to install dev tools etc, but it is of no use for us, as we don't want
>>> users to install msys to install kde.
>>
>> Yes, but we do not want end users to install emerge, etc, either. :-)
>>
>> In other words: it can be managed without ithese helper softwares n my opinion.
>
> So also without pacman and archlinux that you mentioned before.
> End-user software do not require compilation, compilers, shells and so on.
> Depending on how active is given project, standalone installers can be
> an option, see the case of Krita for example.

I had done standalone Windows installers even before any Krita Windows
installer existed. ;-)

So, yes, msys is not an issue here, so is emerge not.

> Unless you've found a *big* sponsor, with guaranteed dedication, KDE
> package managing for windows took years already and it works.

If you check out the history of pacman and emerge, you will notice
that pacman is actually an older project with much more commits and
contributors behind it over the years. It is written in C. This is
already done, and actually even the Windows port.

> It works, do not touch please.

Well, not always (like any other software). For instance, you could
not use emerge with purely http connections (e.g. behind a too strict
fireall, etc). There are things that are blocker for people like me,
but that is probably true in general.

I can just repeat my sentence: "Please do not get me wrong. I am not
saying emerge would not remain useful. It is all about personal choice
I guess. :)"

Perhaps this sentence can be misunderstood, and if so, I would like to
apologize.

I intended to express that emerge is still useful for those people who
prefer that. However, these things are orthogonal in my opinion, and
you cannot limit personal preferences in free software or anywhere
else in leisure time projects for that matter. :)

> Kudos to the team.

See above.

Having a different way of getting there is orthogonal to Kudos. I am
sorry if you got it as a disrepect. It is definitely out of intention.

Just imagine that we have different package managers on Linux as well.
I like this in free software you can select that you feel comfortable
with.

Cheers, L.

PS.: I am now including the kde-windows at kde.org mailing list...
Perhaps, we should continue it in there, although this use cases
define how many licenses we may need ideally from Microsoft if we can
negotiate it...



More information about the kde-community mailing list