[kde-community] Official KDE mirror on github

[Vishesh Handa]

On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Boudewijn Rempt <boud at valdyas.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Sep 2015, Vishesh Handa wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Boudewijn Rempt <boud at valdyas.org>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, 19 Sep 2015, Vishesh Handa wrote:
>>>
>>>> So if project X which is part of KDE also relies on GitHub, but in no
>>>> way recommends it, that will alienate people?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> That's not the issue: the issue is having our official Github mirror
>>> allowing a git-hub based workflow. That should not be possible.
>>
>>
>> Why?
>
>
> In the very first place because that is what we agreed upon when setting
> up this mirror. In the second place, because we need to show a consistent
> face, as a community. In the third place, because by accepting pull
> requests,
> you're putting a load on other people in the KDE community to do so as
> well, whether or not they want to.

I don't see agreement on that fact considering some of the
participants of GitHub do utilize its features.

Other members from the KDE community are welcome to ignore the
alternatives. Just as they do not have access to my personal inbox
where much corresponse often happens, and patches are discussed.


>
>>
>>> As
>>> Ivan said, if a project maintainer is really set on selling their
>>> soul, then by all means use a private, personal, not-officially-KDE
>>> github thing.
>>
>>
>> * There is nothing to do with selling your soul.
>
>
> If _you_ want to use an official KDE thing to promote the use of non-free
> software, you're not just "selling your own soul", you're compromising
> KDE's message.

I'm not promoting its usage. I'm advocating for utilizing its
resources in addition to our own. Just as we utilize other proprietary
platforms (windows, and mac) to improve KDE. No one is advocating
GitHub.

>  And so handling github pull requests to KDE's official
> mirror's repos instead of telling people to use the proper channels is
> breaking up the consistent message we want to convey, and it puts a load
> on other people, who don't want to handle those pull requests: they now
> have to explain why they are grumpy bastarts who don't do what nice-guy-you
> does do.

Please remember this was to be an opt-in basis. Not for all projects.

About being a grumpy bastard, we already have to deal with issues like
that on our bug tracker - "Oh! But that other project in KDE
implemented my stupid wish request or didn't close my bug, why are you
so unreasonable?"

>
> So, if _you_ accept pull requests to a repo in the KDE official mirror, you
> are making decisions for others, and are making other people do things.
>

No I'm not.

Boud, you're shipping Krita on Windows. You're uploading them on the
KDE official website, you're thereby making me pay for Windows if I
want to test it and contribute to the project, you are making
decisions for others.

Does this argument really hold?

>> Each of us has
>> different goals, and we lie on different edges of the spectrum w.r.t
>> Free software. We need all kinds of people.
>
>
> That's fine, but don't use KDE's external interface to confuse the issue.
> We tell the world, this our workflow, this is what we support, this is
> why. Don't compromise that message because you want to be a nice, helpful
> fellow.

I really don't understand this mantra of pushing back everyone else
who doesn't have the exact ideals we do. "If you want to work with us,
you must do so in exactly our terms". Great! Now they won't work with
us.

--
Vishesh Handa