Changes to our Git infrastructure

Milian Wolff mail at
Mon Jan 5 11:43:06 GMT 2015

On Monday 05 January 2015 23:57:40 Ben Cooksley wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 10:05 PM, Jan Kundrát <jkt at> wrote:
> > On Monday, 5 January 2015 06:05:33 CEST, Ben Cooksley wrote:
> >> Ease of installation and it's the availability of the necessary
> >> interpreters within mainstream distributions should be more than
> >> sufficient criteria here. Limiting it by any other criteria is playing
> >> pure favouritism to a given set of language(s) and unnecessarily
> >> limits our options.
> > 
> > Ben, you and Jeff appear to disagree with my point that e.g. requiring a
> > PHP tool to be installed client-side on each developers' and
> > contributors' machine might be a little bit discouraging. It is OK to say
> > that you disagree, but it doesn't prove the point to be any less valid.
> > It's fine to have people assign varying importance to different
> > evaluation criteria, so please do not use your sysadmin hat to
> > unilaterally remove this "pure favoritism" just because you do not see
> > any value in it.
> > 
> > My impression was that we're gathering a list of possible requirements and
> > *then* we, as a community, are going to assign some importance factor to
> > each and every item raised. It is therefore acceptable to have mutually
> > exclusive criteria at this point, or even bits which some of us might find
> > to be totally irrelevant. They are going to be sorted out be community's
> > consensus, I suppose.
> The list of requirements is first gathered from the community. We then
> summarize it with items being weighted based on the level of support
> mentioned by various people and send it back. If everyone is broadly
> happy we then go ahead and prepare solutions which meet this list of
> requirements. There is no community level sorting of the items because
> items don't have a priority - it is a best effort basis to meet all of
> the requested features and functions.
> These proposals are accompanied by the pros and cons each faces, along
> with a recommendation for the one we believe best fits the needs of
> the community.
> You can see an example of this in the initial setup which
> Sysadmin did many years ago (2010 I think).

Hm, why don't we do a prioritization poll? Quite some items raised by others 
are totally unimportant to me, and probably vice versa. While I agree that it 
would be nice to make everyone happy, I doubt that's going to work out. If we 
concentrate on the important aspects first, the admins would have less work 
and most people are still happy.

Milian Wolff
mail at

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list