[Kde-pim] QT 5.6.0

Fri Apr 15 13:29:48 BST 2016

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-pim/attachments/20160415/7d02caf4/attachment.sig>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
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/