[kde-community] Official KDE mirror on github

Boudhayan Gupta bgupta at kde.org
Sat Sep 19 14:37:25 UTC 2015

On 19 September 2015 at 19:34, Vishesh Handa <me at vhanda.in> wrote:
> Please note that consistency isn't a requirement to be part of KDE. If
> I decide to write an application in Rust, which is only for Windows,
> and uses a completely different build system, that is allowed.

How are these two things even remotely similar? Of course you're
allowed to write a Windows specific app in Rust. Hell, according to
the manifesto we should be able to write apps for the Commodore64 if
we want to, provided that the software complies with licensing and
community engagement requirements of the KDE community. On a more
realistic note, almost all KDE apps have their own coding style, and
every maintainer has their own standard on how far to stick to these

It is important to note that we're talking about infrastructural
consistency here, not code consistency. There is a distinction. What
you're suggesting is akin to GitHub deciding to have a HTML5 text
console for half their repository pages, and their standard web
interface for the other half, with glitzy christmas decorations and
falling snow effects put on a few pages for good measure.

>> 3. Regarding point 4, if developers already have personal GitHub
>> clones that they use for their own purposes, nothing is stopping them
>> from continuing to use them. Those clones are not endorsed by KDE,
>> they are under complete control of the individual
>> developers/maintainers, they are entirely the responsibility of the
>> developers/maintainers, and the developers/maintainers are free to do
>> with them as they see fit.
> Because maintainers are not responsible for their own projects anyway?
> If I'm taking responsibility for a project, I'm also taking
> responsibility for other parts of it. In this case Github. No one is
> forcing anyone.

Common ownership. There's a difference between any random open source
project on GitHub/SF.net/elsewhere and a KDE project. Maintainers are
responsible for their own projects (that's why they're maintainers).
They're also responsible for playing nice with the rest of the
community and abiding by the requirements of the rest of the
community. Also, while the rest of KDE may not have a say in the code
of the project (the maintainer is the maintainer because he/she
understands the code to a higher degree than the rest of the people
here), they do have a say in the project's governance.

>> Here's what developers and maintainers should really do: forget that
>> github.com/kde exists.
> They can do that if they are comfortable with the status-quo. Some
> people are clearly not. Your email disregards the points raised and
> implies that the github readonly mirror is only what is acceptable.
> That result is clearly not shared by everyone.

This comment disregards the entire e-mail which is about why the
read-only mirror should be acceptable. Again, why it should be
acceptable is because it's as important to the KDE infrastructure as
an anongit server.

>> For all practical purposes, it does not exist.
>> It isn't there. It should never be a part of your workflow. You should
>> never ever look at it. It is simply an additional clone source, just
>> like KDE's anongit servers. That's it.
> This is the part of your email I really like. Though this is not what
> you meant: If projectX choose to also use Github, it is not affecting
> your project in anyway. Just ignore it and move on.

I re-iterate. github.com/kde is a place where people outside the KDE
ecosystem can come and see the code in all its glory. To a KDE
developer, it does not exist.

Boudhayan Gupta

More information about the kde-community mailing list