[Kde-pim] QT 5.6.0

Fri Apr 15 18:12:00 BST 2016

On April 15, 2016 4:29:00 PM GMT+02:00, Scarlett Clark <scarlett.gately.clark at gmail.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>From the CI team ( of 2! ). Qt5.6 is in the works, but currently
>broken. We
>hope to have it resolved soon.

You guys rock! 

Dan

>
>Cheers,
>Scarlett
>
>On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 5:29 AM, Kevin Ottens <ervin at kde.org> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> On Friday, 15 April 2016 13:59:46 CEST laurent Montel wrote:
>> > Le vendredi 15 avril 2016, 13:25:36 CEST Kevin Ottens a écrit :
>> > > On Friday, 15 April 2016 13:08:55 CEST laurent Montel wrote:
>> > > > Le vendredi 15 avril 2016, 12:38:23 CEST Sandro Knauß a écrit :
>> > > > > well but we don't have plasma as dependecy - kdepim should be
>> > > > > installable without Plasma.  Argumeting about Plasma is not a
>valid
>> > > > > argument.
>> > > >
>> > > > But when we build from master we build plasma too
>> > >
>> > > You do, I don't...
>> >
>> > Perhaps but when we use kdesrcbuild we do it.
>>
>> Sure, that's still not the mandatory way of working (and shall not
>be) so
>> don't assume others are using it (again I don't at the moment).
>>
>> > > Don't force your way of working onto others. Especially
>> > > something as radical: again, you're proactively pushing potential
>> > > contributors away with that thinking.
>> >
>> > Potential contributors...
>> > If I look at last months/last releases and I look at commit I don't
>see a
>> > lot of contributor no ?
>> > For kdepim 5.2 how many contributors did you see ?
>>
>> Keep acting like that and we can predict it'll stay like that for the
>> years to
>> come. It would be good for kdepim sake if you also start thinking
>about
>> what
>> you are doing, and not doing, which make the contributor base stay at
>one.
>>
>> You did a few technical moves which hopefully will help with the
>> complexity.
>> That is good and necessary to hope seeing more contributors again.
>>
>> But the lack of contributors is not only about technical issues. The
>points
>> highlighted in this thread are not of technical nature... They will
>also
>> need
>> to be addressed to hope seeing more contributors again.
>>
>> > > [...]
>> > > No one is "against 5.6" per say here... But most are trying to
>make you
>> > > realize that you can't switch things like that when it pleases
>you,
>> that's
>> > > the price to pay for working with others and other teams,
>> >
>> > Which "others" ?!
>> > In kdepim/kdepim-addons who works on it ?!
>>
>> Not only the commit rate counts... Re-read our emails, it's also
>about the
>> CI.
>> You are working with those people in some way, even if you choose to
>> ignore it
>> apparently.
>>
>> And you like complaining about the lack of help you get on KDEPIM?
>Then
>> think
>> about Scarlett and Ben who have to run the CI and deal with the
>> dependencies
>> there. Think about the amount of requests and pressure they get from
>all
>> the
>> people having a KDE repository. And now try to picture that you broke
>a
>> sizeable share of what the CI does for others and they will have to
>deal
>> with
>> it.
>>
>> So not only they don't get enough help on the CI, like you on
>KDEPIM...
>> but on
>> top of that your unilateral decision here and your unwillingness to
>> cooperate
>> generate even more work for them. It'd be somewhat similar to having
>> someone
>> just starting committing random stuff in the kdepim repositories
>which you
>> don't like, without talking to you about it, and refusing to revert
>those
>> changes. It's not lack of help anymore at that point, it's actively
>> generating
>> extra problems for others.
>>
>> You are part of a larger community, please don't forget it.
>>
>> > > that's the price
>> > > to pay to have one day a useful CI for KDEPIM.
>> > >
>> > > Note that a "useful CI for KDEPIM" is badly needed if we want to
>have
>> the
>> > > faintest chance of reworking the applications architecture as
>discussed
>> > > during the sprint. It is *that* important.
>> >
>> > For sure it's important.
>>
>> Then start acting like it is important to you indeed.
>>
>> > > > I am blocked for the moment to finish kmail qtwebengine support
>with
>> > > > actual
>> > > > code so I need to switch it for finish it.
>> > > > I didn't activate it for 16.04 as Qt5.6 was not release now
>it's
>> release
>> > > > so
>> > > > I will switch.
>> > > > I will not wait august 2016 to wait for finding bugs.
>> > >
>> > > You really should look at the situation in a less binary way...
>master
>> > > could start depending on Qt 5.6 at some point, maybe even before
>august
>> > > who knows.
>> >
>> > As you write Nobody knows.
>> >
>> > > But this needs to be discussed and orchestrated properly to not
>> > > generate pain for everyone else but you.
>> >
>> > As all discussions it will be an endless discussion as I need it
>and
>> during
>> > this time it will just me which works on kdepim as usual...
>>
>> Really... in this thread I've seen you mostly writing in term of "I
>want",
>> "I", "me"... it's disappointing to say the least. Also, as long as
>you
>> think
>> solely along those lines it will indeed generate endless discussions
>and
>> you
>> will be alone working on the code.
>>
>> I think that's two things you don't like... but you are in part
>inflicting
>> them upon yourself at the moment.
>>
>> Regards.
>> --
>> Kévin Ottens, http://ervin.ipsquad.net
>>
>> KDAB - proud supporter of KDE, http://www.kdab.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> KDE PIM mailing list kde-pim at kde.org
>> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-pim
>> KDE PIM home page at http://pim.kde.org/
>>
>_______________________________________________
>KDE PIM mailing list kde-pim at kde.org
>https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-pim
>KDE PIM home page at http://pim.kde.org/

--
Daniel Vrátil
www.dvratil.cz | me at dvratil.cz
facebook.com/danvratil | @danvratil | +DanVrátil
_______________________________________________
KDE PIM mailing list kde-pim at kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-pim
KDE PIM home page at http://pim.kde.org/