[kde-community] Official KDE mirror on github

[Jaroslaw Staniek]

On 18 September 2015 at 22:55, Andre Heinecke <aheinecke at intevation.de> wrote:
> On Friday 18 September 2015 22:29:31 Jaroslaw Staniek wrote:
>> I don't argue with that it needs free tools. Of course we need to be
>> able to operate as usual when the nonfree tools disappear.
>
> As one of the KDE-Windows developers. Who would be able to cope if their
> precious Visual Studio is unavailable? Well probably you, Ralf and me (Because
> I never used that compiler). The other developers are suckered in a "I'ts free
> (as in beer)" (just like github) mentality and didn't learn to how the basics
> work that are automated when they use visual studio. So their knowledge is
> dependent on the tools.

I learned that investing in mimicking *nix experience on windows
(cygwin, mingw, finally plasma on Windows) is a dead end. If msvc
disappears I'll be more than happy and fund a big company the next
day. Hundreds of folks would come to for help to port/maintain somehow
the their codebase on the new standard dev platform[tm].

If you care to look why: by using "standards" on the platform I
minimize my risks.
When I support my apps on GNOME I obey to the rules of GNOME. Same for
Unity, Windows, Mac, and mobile etc. or don't proceed. Everything else
is not worth my time. Your experience and interest may be different
and I accept that.

Cheap example: I know people running win95 on an android phone.

If you pick mingw for example, you're just picking different boundary
that you can effectively accept between Free and non-Free. I'd ask,
even if MS changed its attitude 179 degrees now, what happens if mingw
can't be effectively (technically/legally) used on Windows? And what's
more probable? There's no clear answer.
Note, I am developing on Linux which objectively is far better
environment for the task. So no matter what compiler I use, this is
mostly a deployment task. Plus maybe making things so beauty that
users of non-free platforms (99.5+% for my market) donate to drive the
open development.

>> I do argue with 'Free software needs to reject nonfree tools even at
>> the cost of alienating most of the non-KDE world'.
>
> I would argue against that. Encouraging Free Software tools even if they are
> not as convenient as proprietary tools is very important. Hell I'm hacking
> together Outlook Addins using free tools because the Idea is that you should
> not rely on proprietary tools to work on / with Free Software.
>
>> Disclaimer: unlike
>> rms I don't have access to secretary who browser the internet for me.
>> And I still use GSM.
>
> What do those two sentences mean? I interpret the first one as a cheap shot
> against Richard Stallman. (Uhhhhhh He eats things from his toes!!! Have you
> seen the video?!!!!!!)
> I fail to understand the second sentence.

Scary :)
It's a cheap and colorful example of an unrealistic approach of
someone who sometimes forget he's just a human being.  I know I just
won't meet too many contributors if I am suspicious on the first
contact. The second sentence means that we're all (except for rms :))
using closed protocols for vital parts of our lives. BTW, rms isn't
consistent - last time he travelled to Poland via plane full of
closed-source software and even worse hardware. It's his choice but
forcing it on me steals parts of my freedom.

>> It comes down to the question if one acts more inclusive or exclusive.
>>
>> For you: that's like 'reject closed-source drivers for kwin even if I
>> won't be able to use cool kwin features' type of rejection.
>>
>> I wouldn't have problem if presence on github would be completely
>> opt-in as Friedrich suggested, based on subprojects' requests. It
>> would also help to sort out the issue with some obsolete repos.
>> Yesterday just dying in project.kde.org playgrounds and today
>> everything is mirrored on github. Or is it too late?
>
> No I don't think that is the point. For me it is more like "Do we start to
> accept patches that are created by this proprietary tool and review them using
> this same tool?"

I did not say that. It's not even similar. Read this as opt-in. You
don't get these notifications in projects where I am the maintainer.

Patches are created by like-minded individuals in their brilliant
minds. How they are encoded, transmitted and visualised does not
matter. They can come to me by email and land in proprietary inbox
that I read with the help of my properietary x86 CPU. So what.

> It's like asking me to install Visual Studio to review and accept patches. No
> I will not do this <period> (Yeah github is a webapp but the principle still
> applies imo)

I did not say that. It's not even similar.

There people willing to help with a simple thing of pasting a patch
into phabricator.
Writing a patch is quite more expensive so if it lands anywhere I'll
travel there to grab it and say thank you.

Your experience may differ and I value that. Opt-in - nobody forces you.

-- 
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