On Thursday, September 12, 2024 9:52:20 PM CEST Julius Künzel wrote:
[...]
> I just tried to port Kdenlive to REUSE.toml using the `reuse convert-dep5`
> tool:
> https://invent.kde.org/multimedia/kdenlive/-/merge_requests/535/diffs
>
> However now it complains about REUSE.toml itself not having
Hi, this is a short heads-up that the CI check for "reuse-lint" is now updated
to version fsfe/reuse:4, which in practical terms mean that now the linter
checks for conformance with REUSE Spec 3.2. -- No projects should start to
fail with this update (I manually checked the repositories known to
Hi Ayush,
thank you for bringing this topic up to the mailing list. From the choice of
licenses, IMHO it comes to either use a permissive license that is compatible
with as much source code as possible (that would be probably either MIT or
BSD-2-Clause) or using a smallest common denominator co
On Donnerstag, 28. Januar 2021 10:20:54 CET Konstantin Kharlamov wrote:
> On Wed, 2021-01-27 at 17:36 -0500, Michael Reeves wrote:
> > Is there way to reading and writing small files in the CI? I'm in the
> > process of writing auto tests for kdiff3.
>
> Your tests could create a directory inside
Hi Johnny,
I read it exactly the same way. So this looks completely fine to me.
Yet, I would suggest to have a look at REUSE compatible license statements,
which make it much easier to see which files are under which license. Even if
one should not refer to oneself for reference, here is a star
On Freitag, 25. September 2020 21:53:49 CEST Matthieu Gallien wrote:
[...]
> What would be the way to build a consensus on this subject inside KDE ?
Hi, we dissolved the licensing mailing list some time ago in favor to move
such discussions on the community list. However, copyright year bumps are
On Montag, 21. September 2020 22:32:37 CEST Matthieu Gallien wrote:
> Is there some consensus as to what is best for code hosted by the KDE
> community ?
Hi, that is a good question! I cannot recall that we discussed this during the
last decade. Anyways, there is not a documented consensus either
[...]
> SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause
> sounds like a great idea for default default CMakeLists.txt header
Hi, actually we already have that statement in our KDE licensing policy [1]
since several years that CMake files shall be licensed under BSD. The policy
defaults to BSD-2-Clause a
On Sunday, February 28, 2016 11:25:23 AM CET Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> El Saturday 27 February 2016, a les 14:26:14, Christian Kalkhoff va
escriure:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I just read the now current version of the "First program" tutorial [1]
> > and
> > discovered that the source code examples are no
On Wednesday, January 27, 2016 1:08:38 PM CET Wolfgang Mader wrote:
> Dear list,
>
> inspired by the mail concerning the KF5 port status of Okular, I kindly
> want to ask about the KF5 porting effort of Kile. According to the
> portingstatus page[1], Kile should be ready to go. Is there a timeline
On Monday 18 January 2016 22:08:31 Andreas Cord-Landwehr wrote:
> On Monday, January 18, 2016 9:49:32 PM CET Juan Carlos Torres wrote:
> > > Having that to coordinate the effort, I think it will be easier for
others
> > > to just pick a tutorial for update/reviewing.
On Monday, January 18, 2016 8:05:34 PM CET Gregor Mi wrote:
> > Juan Carlos Torres
> > Jucato
> >
> > 1. https://techbase.kde.org/Development/Tutorials/First_program and
> > successive tutorials
> > 2. https://techbase.kde.org/Development/Tutorials/First_program/KDE4
>
> Towards the end, in the s
On Monday, January 18, 2016 9:49:32 PM CET Juan Carlos Torres wrote:
> > Having that to coordinate the effort, I think it will be easier for others
> > to just pick a tutorial for update/reviewing.
>
> I'm not that familiar with Phabricator (yet). I'm barely familiar with
> Reviewboard and our oth
On Saturday, January 16, 2016 6:41:21 PM CET Juan Carlos Torres wrote:
[...]
> That said, I'm not 100% sure about the accuracy of my ported code, so more
> eyes are much appreciated. The KIO part (saving and loading files) was
> particularly tricky as there wasn't a 1:1 equivalent. And KIO and Jobs
On Thursday 04 December 2014 23:52:11 Milian Wolff wrote:
> OK, apparently I'm dooing something wrong. *How* do I request such a
> repository/review, if not by sending this email to kde-devel?
Usually, one first fills a sysadmin ticket at
https://sysadmin.kde.org/tickets/
and once the move to k
On Thursday 17 July 2014 08:13:59 Shantanu Tushar Jha wrote:
> Looking from a user's perspective who has been using KDE for some
time now,
> this sounds confusing. The reason is that Plasma is 5 and then
applications
> will be called 2014.mm, its just too much of a difference. And I'm not just
>
On Saturday 26 April 2014 11:57:24 Christoph Feck wrote:
> > [...] The reason behind is that the KF5/Qt5 porting creates
> > quite disruptive changes (QtQuick1 to QtQuick2; port away from
> > QGraphicsScene). Thus any new feature merges from the Qt4
>
> branches
>
> > are very painfull.
>
> Note
On Saturday 26 April 2014 05:28:18 Inge Wallin wrote:
> But mostly I think that an LTS release should be about stability. This is
> not something you get immediately after you port to a new framework and a
> new toolkit at the same time.
>
> I think we should do a 4.15 and at the same time do as m
On Friday 07 March 2014 11:29:52 Jos Poortvliet wrote:
> But there is more. We (the promo team) would like to write an article to ask
> our community to help test this release and we'd appreciate it if you could
> tell us WHAT exactly could use some extra testing!
I would be grateful for feature t
On Tuesday 07 January 2014 04:28:04 Amarvir Singh wrote:
> Regarding implementation of synonyms in KDE Edu Parley:
Hi Amarvir, please keep the discussion at one list. That makes it easier for
everybody to follow. And I think the thread at the kde-edu list (where you
also sent this mail to) is mo
On Sunday 10 February 2013 19:28:19 Alexander Rössler wrote:
> I'm interested in adding my application to the KDE project and to mentor
> some students during GSoC. The application is PhyxCalc (http://qt-
> apps.org/content/show.php/PhyxCalc?content=149140
> ). I think I have already mentioned it l
On Wednesday 23 November 2011 18:47:12 Lydia Pintscher wrote:
> While this would be awesome to have it is way too big for what I am
> looking for here unfortunately.
Hi, I remember this mail some month ago about combining notes plasmoids.
Together with Akonadi+Nepomuk integration this could be a
22 matches
Mail list logo
