[kde-community] Bikeshedding - our strength apparently *sigh*

Martin Graesslin mgraesslin at kde.org
Sat Sep 19 15:36:09 UTC 2015

On Saturday, September 19, 2015 5:19:16 PM CEST Riccardo Iaconelli wrote:
> On Saturday, September 19, 2015 10:58:09 AM Michael Pyne wrote:
> > Is anyone actually arguing this point in the way you ask? No one's asking
> > to  prevent "one offs" entirely, the core of the issue is that KDE
> > development should happen *within* KDE-the-whole-community, not *apart
> > from* KDE.
> Nobody is proposing to move there the development! And pull requests are
> really "one offs", no stable contributor would sensibly use them as a
> regular basis, just like no stable contributor doesn't get an account and
> develops only through mailing patches...
> This whole thread started with one sentence which started like "if somebody
> sends me a patch, it doesn't matter if she/he sends it to me via mail,
> github, or by post... if it's good work, I am going to integrate it". I
> think we should keep to that and not escalate it to "some KDE projects move
> to github for development".
> I think there was some confusion on that point, so let me state this again:
> the agreement is that github mirrors ARE going to be kept read-only, so
> someone with a KDE account and the developer karma still has to push the
> patch to git.kde.org (or reviewboard or so on...), if he wants to see it
> integrated. I don't see how that destroys our values. I just see it as a
> way through which potential newcomers can submit their first contribution,
> instead of mailing a patch.
> At least, in my view, the mirrors will STILL be *READ-ONLY*.

I disagree. What I write now I mean for anything hosted under KDE/* and not 
e.g. mgraesslin/*

If we have some projects accepting pull requests it creates pressure for other 
projects to also accept pull requests. This means my identity.kde.org account 
is no longer enough to maintain a KDE project.

Pullrequests in the github are more than a way to submit a patch. It's also 
code review. At the point where this would happen, part of the community is 
excluded from participating in the code review process. Even more part of our 
code actually moves to github. Previous versions of the patch are then only 
available through github infrastructure.

Thus I see the requests of allowing github pull requests as a way to move 
development to github.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-community/attachments/20150919/6d8cede6/attachment.sig>

More information about the kde-community mailing list