KDE now has its own Matrix infrastructure

[Scott Harvey]

Okay, I can see the point made by Laszlo and Helio. I retract my request
after further consideration.

I'm a part of the community, as is this discussion, and so I suppose it
should stay on the community mailing list.

Apologies for intervening... please continue.

-Scott

On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 8:49 AM Laszlo Papp <lpapp at kde.org> wrote:

> Hi Scott,
>
> I can see your point, so not trying to challenge it.
>
> I just feel that open means open, not open like in facebook context. In a
> completely open environment, it is not just the success and easiness that
> becomes available, but some respectful and fair arguments, difficulties,
> etc, that need addressing.
>
> I feel that KDE as a community will eventually benefit from feedback and
> discussions like this if the community takes proper actions going forward.
>
> Best regards,
> Laszlo Papp
>
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 2:31 PM Scott Harvey <scott at spharvey.me> wrote:
>
>> Jonathan, et al -
>>
>> Can I respectfully ask that this debate/dispute be moved elsewhere?
>>
>> I've been on hiatus from my role as a minor KDE contibutor for a few
>> months. It's not encouraging to resume paying attention only to find
>> another argument in progress.
>>
>> I suppose it could be argued that this maillist is intended for community
>> discussion and that this is indeed a community issue... I just don't feel
>> it's good for morale (mine, at least).
>>
>>
>> -Scott (sharvey)
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 7:34 AM, Jonathan Riddell <jr at jriddell.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> The workboard item is https://phabricator.kde.org/T10477 , it wasn't
>> tagged KDE promo, it wasn't sent to the dot-editors list and I wasn't
>> pinged (I'm the only active volunteer Dot editor). I've tried to discuss
>> problems in promo with the e.V. board and CWG in the past when long term
>> contributors have left, when the team was changed from a community team to
>> a closed access team, when our mailing lists were micro managed or when I
>> was insulted for organising a conference stall but I've only been dismissed
>> or ignored and the community at large seems happy for that to happen so I
>> can't offer any assurances of changes. Jonathan On Tue, 26 Feb 2019 at
>> 11:46, Christian Loosli <kde at fuchsnet.ch> wrote:
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-community/attachments/20190226/cbe2d665/attachment.htm>