CI Requirements - Lessons Not Learnt?

Martin Gräßlin mgraesslin at
Mon Jan 16 06:48:25 GMT 2017

Am 2017-01-15 22:58, schrieb Alexander Neundorf:
> Hi Martin,
> just replying somewhere...
> On 2017 M01 15, Sun 14:52:30 CET Martin Gräßlin wrote:
>> I think that is a reasonable suggestion. If distros patch our
>> dependencies we need to consider this as a fork. And a fork should be
>> called a fork. It needs to be clear that KDE is not responsible for 
>> any
>> issues caused by the fork and thus the complete product must be 
>> renamed.
>> Also if a component like KWin gets forked this means that the complete
>> product Plasma has to be considered as forked.
> please excuse me, but I'd like to share some thoughts on the situation 
> from a
> non-technical POV. Maybe it can give you an impulse to think about the
> situation. Ignore them if you think it is inappropriate.

I think they are highly inappropriate and insulting. It makes me think 
"Dann macht euren Scheiss doch alleine".

> - OTOH, if you are maintaining kwin fulltime as paid job, I consider it
> reasonable to expect that the maintainer is able to maintain necessary
> #ifdefs,

Just answering that part. I do hope that nobody in the KDE community has 
such expectation from company involvement. We should be thankful for the 
work companies like Blue Systems put into KDE and not start demanding to 
do boring and stupid tasks. I at least do not differentiate in the 
expectation of paid and unpaid developers. To me everyone is equal.

I am also wondering why you haven't scratched your itch and provided the 


P.S.: I'm pissed about the highly inappropriate, personally attacking 
approach of this thread. I am seriously questioning why I'm involved 
with a community behaving like that.

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list