CI Requirements - Lessons Not Learnt?

[Eike Hein]

I'll use this as a launching-off point to continue the debate:

Coming out of the weekend, after reflecting a little, I no longer
feel like the extremely hard approach I took in the current draft
is appropriate for the community at large, in line with ade's
concerns of over-democratizing. I don't think the use of "manda-
tory" is ultimately realistic for the bulk of KDE.org projects
(only a small number has developers who put in 40h/week), the
effects of trying to enforce these rules would be far more dama-
ging to the community than the gain, and it's important to remem-
ber that most KDE.org developers were never polled on whether or
not to use CI in the first place.

I'll be working up a new draft today taking some of the comments
so far into account, and giving sysadmin the latitude to remove
projects from CI at their decision if the guidelines are violated
and maintaining a project on CI becomes unreasonable. This limits
scope of enforcement (i.e. the consequences for falling out of
line) to participation in CI instead of the community, which
seems more pragmatic in hindsight.


Cheers,
Eike