KDE now has its own Matrix infrastructure

[Christian Loosli]

Hi Jonathan, 

thanks for the wrap-up. 
I am less interested in pointing blame, and more interested in 

- how this could have happened
- what our learnings are so this doesn't happen again in the future?

It still is unclear to me how non-true accusations without further explanation 
made it into the article. Even for people who are not familiar with the 
subject, this imho should never happen. If you are not sure, you don't throw 
around accusations of things being insecure. 
It bothers me even more that there is a lengthy discussion on the subject (and 
a follow up survey and result) available to the people who participated in 
this, the article looked to me like this discussion, survey and result (that 
we did put a lot of time and effort in) were ignored.

>From what I gathered it even was given to the right people to proof-read, but 
the article was released without waiting for a reply. How can that happen, and 
why was it so urgent to push that article out? 

So to avoid this in the future, I'd like to see us following a process that 
does involved proof-reading by people familiar with the subject, so we look as 
professional as we as KDE should be by now, and usually are. 

As a last but not least, I'm also not terribly happy when people involved were 
also the ones still, in public, making statements against one of the 
technologies we decided to use and support, stating we should abandon them.
Together with the flawed article this doesn't look good. 
I'd love to see people at least try to not let their personal views bias them 
too much, especially not when a group decision was made. I have my personal 
views and preferences on this too, but I try my best to accept the decision 
taken and support it. 

Thanks and kind regards, 

Christian