On Tuesday 08 April 2014 22:25:48 Ben Cooksley wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 8:53 PM, Kevin Ottens wrote:
> > Hello,
>
> Hi all,
>
> > On Thursday 03 April 2014 09:50:24 Jos Poortvliet wrote:
> >> On Wednesday 19 March 2014 10:41:15 Ben Cooksley wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 7:15 AM, K
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 8:53 PM, Kevin Ottens wrote:
> Hello,
Hi all,
>
> On Thursday 03 April 2014 09:50:24 Jos Poortvliet wrote:
>> On Wednesday 19 March 2014 10:41:15 Ben Cooksley wrote:
>> > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 7:15 AM, Kevin Ottens wrote:
>> > > Hello,
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > > On Monda
On Friday 28 March 2014 20:17:40 Markus Slopianka wrote:
> On Friday 28 March 2014 15:42:16 David Faure wrote:
> > Well we can't deprecate both khtml and kdewebkit. What do we use then,
> > right now, to browse the web in a KDE application?
>
> Deprecate does not mean that both are not available a
On Wednesday 19 March 2014 10:41:15 Ben Cooksley wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 7:15 AM, Kevin Ottens wrote:
> > Hello,
>
> Hi,
>
> > On Monday 17 March 2014 22:53:25 Mario Fux KDE ML wrote:
> >> Am Montag, 17. März 2014, 18.15:09 schrieb Kevin Ottens:
> >> > Porting Aids:
> >> > * kde4suppor
Hello,
On Thursday 03 April 2014 09:50:24 Jos Poortvliet wrote:
> On Wednesday 19 March 2014 10:41:15 Ben Cooksley wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 7:15 AM, Kevin Ottens wrote:
> > > Hello,
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > > On Monday 17 March 2014 22:53:25 Mario Fux KDE ML wrote:
> > >> Am Montag, 17. Mä
On Friday 28 March 2014 15:42:16 David Faure wrote:
> Well we can't deprecate both khtml and kdewebkit. What do we use then, right
> now, to browse the web in a KDE application?
Deprecate does not mean that both are not available any longer, just that 3rd
party developers don't get a wrong impre
On Tuesday 18 March 2014 17:32:58 Markus Slopianka wrote:
> On Tuesday 18 March 2014 13:37:01 Aleix Pol wrote:
> > Can we maybe agree that we want an extra value in the .yaml
> > file
> > indicating the maturity of the project?
>
> It's not about maturity, it's about security. QtWebKit is no longe
On Wednesday 26 March 2014 20:47:23 John Layt wrote:
> On 26 March 2014 20:08, Kevin Ottens wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Tuesday 25 March 2014 16:41:12 Jos Poortvliet wrote:
> >> Just imagine what header would you like to see on an
> >> announcement/article:
> >> * Frameworks 5 To Not Include Dep
On 26 March 2014 20:08, Kevin Ottens wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tuesday 25 March 2014 16:41:12 Jos Poortvliet wrote:
>> Just imagine what header would you like to see on an announcement/article:
>> * Frameworks 5 To Not Include Deprecated Technologies
>> * KDE Porting Aids To Have Three Releases
>> *
Hello,
On Tuesday 25 March 2014 16:41:12 Jos Poortvliet wrote:
> On Monday 17 March 2014 18:15:09 Kevin Ottens wrote:
> > Adding kde-promo in CC since it might have implications on future
> > communication.
>
> Ok, reading the whole thing - it seems a simple dot story would be useful to
> explain
Hi!
El 26/03/2014 13:04, "Jos Poortvliet" escribió:
>
> On Monday 17 March 2014 18:15:09 Kevin Ottens wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Thanks for the feedback!
> >
> > Adding kde-promo in CC since it might have implications on future
> > communication.
>
> Ok, reading the whole thing - it seems a simple
On Monday 17 March 2014 18:15:09 Kevin Ottens wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Thanks for the feedback!
>
> Adding kde-promo in CC since it might have implications on future
> communication.
Ok, reading the whole thing - it seems a simple dot story would be useful to
explain that we've made some decisions t
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 7:15 AM, Kevin Ottens wrote:
> Hello,
Hi,
>
> On Monday 17 March 2014 22:53:25 Mario Fux KDE ML wrote:
>> Am Montag, 17. März 2014, 18.15:09 schrieb Kevin Ottens:
>> > Porting Aids:
>> > * kde4support (obvious);
>>
>> Just that it doesn't get forgotten I'd like to second
On Tuesday 18 March 2014 13:37:01 Aleix Pol wrote:
> Can we maybe agree that we want an extra value in the .yaml file
> indicating the maturity of the project?
It's not about maturity, it's about security. QtWebKit is no longer maintained
by Digia and I am not aware that anybody stepped up to ma
On Monday 17 March 2014 18:15:09 Kevin Ottens wrote:
> Now, the last point... What else do we want to move from KDE Frameworks to
> KDE Porting Aids? Aleix and Aaron proposed the following content for KDE
> Porting Aids:
> * kde4support (obvious);
> * khtml (planned for a long time);
> * kjs (b
Hello,
On Tuesday 18 March 2014 13:37:01 Aleix Pol wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 4:36 AM, Markus Slopianka wrote:
> > On Monday 17 March 2014 18:15:09 Kevin Ottens wrote:
> > > Now, the last point... What else do we want to move from KDE Frameworks
> >
> > to
> >
> > > KDE Porting Aids? Alei
On Monday 17 March 2014 20:14:24 John Layt wrote:
> On 17 March 2014 18:15, Kevin Ottens wrote:
> > I think that list makes sense. Is there anyone who couldn't sleep at night
> > if those were in KDE Porting Aids?
>
> +1 to this strategy, although some bikeshedding on the "portingaids"
> name mig
Hello,
On Monday 17 March 2014 22:53:25 Mario Fux KDE ML wrote:
> Am Montag, 17. März 2014, 18.15:09 schrieb Kevin Ottens:
> > Porting Aids:
> > * kde4support (obvious);
>
> Just that it doesn't get forgotten I'd like to second Aarons (or who it was)
> proposal to rename kde4support to kdelibs4s
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014, at 5:37, Aleix Pol wrote:
Maybe coming up with the list of modules now is not the most useful
thing now.
Can we maybe agree that we want an extra value in the .yaml
file indicating the maturity of the project?
+1
Aurélien
___
Kde
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 4:36 AM, Markus Slopianka wrote:
> On Monday 17 March 2014 18:15:09 Kevin Ottens wrote:
>
> > Now, the last point... What else do we want to move from KDE Frameworks
> to
> > KDE Porting Aids? Aleix and Aaron proposed the following content for KDE
> > Porting Aids:
> > *
On 17/03/14 18:50, Treeve Jelbert wrote:
> On Monday 17 March 2014 18:15:09 Kevin Ottens wrote:
> Now, the last point... What else do we want to move from KDE Frameworks to
>> KDE Porting Aids? Aleix and Aaron proposed the following content for KDE
>> Porting Aids:
>> * kde4support (obvious);
>>
Am Montag, 17. März 2014, 18.15:09 schrieb Kevin Ottens:
> Hello,
Morning Kevin
> Thanks for the feedback!
Thanks for your coordination!
[snip]
> Now, the last point... What else do we want to move from KDE Frameworks to
> KDE Porting Aids? Aleix and Aaron proposed the following content for KD
On 17 March 2014 20:14, John Layt wrote:
> I like the limit on kde4support, we only have to look to Qt3Support to
> know that if the aids are left in place people will avoid porting away
> from them until they absolutely have to. I'm not sure we need to call
> it a "product" though, perhaps just
On 17 March 2014 18:15, Kevin Ottens wrote:
> So let's pick the following cocktail: 1, 2 and 4.
>
> That means we immediately move khtml and kde4support out of KDE Frameworks (to
> be widely advertised) and into a KDE Porting Aids product (to be advertised
> only to existing KDE developers).
>
> B
On 17 March 2014 16:45, Alex Merry wrote:
> On 17/03/14 15:25, Aurélien Gâteau wrote:
>> What worries me with this approach is it feels like comparing apples and
>> oranges here. To me a framework "tier" is about its dependencies, not
>> about its maturity. I would suggest to instead introduce an
On Monday 17 March 2014 18:15:09 Kevin Ottens wrote:
Now, the last point... What else do we want to move from KDE Frameworks to
> KDE Porting Aids? Aleix and Aaron proposed the following content for KDE
> Porting Aids:
> * kde4support (obvious);
> * khtml (planned for a long time);
> * kjs (bec
On 17/03/14 17:15, Kevin Ottens wrote:
> Now, the last point... What else do we want to move from KDE Frameworks to
> KDE
> Porting Aids? Aleix and Aaron proposed the following content for KDE Porting
> Aids:
> * kde4support (obvious);
> * khtml (planned for a long time);
> * kjs (because of
> Hello,
>
> Thanks for the feedback!
>
> Adding kde-promo in CC since it might have implications on future
> communication.
>
> On Saturday 15 March 2014 16:59:54 Kevin Ottens wrote:
> > Here are the different options, they're clearly not mutually exclusive.
> >
> > 1) Split Tier 4 in a Tier 4
Hello,
Thanks for the feedback!
Adding kde-promo in CC since it might have implications on future
communication.
On Saturday 15 March 2014 16:59:54 Kevin Ottens wrote:
> Here are the different options, they're clearly not mutually exclusive.
>
> 1) Split Tier 4 in a Tier 4 and a Tier Deprecate
On 17/03/14 15:25, Aurélien Gâteau wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 15, 2014, at 8:59, Kevin Ottens wrote:
>> 1) Split Tier 4 in a Tier 4 and a Tier Deprecated :)
>> Currently we can consider Tier 4 as badly defined. It contains both parts
>> with
>> no API (apidox, frameworkintegration, kfileaudiopreview) ma
On Sat, Mar 15, 2014, at 8:59, Kevin Ottens wrote:
> 1) Split Tier 4 in a Tier 4 and a Tier Deprecated :)
> Currently we can consider Tier 4 as badly defined. It contains both parts
> with
> no API (apidox, frameworkintegration, kfileaudiopreview) mainly for
> integration between frameworks and p
On Saturday, March 15, 2014 16:59:54 Kevin Ottens wrote:
> we would be releasing 5.0 with modules which would be immediately
> deprecated.
the modules that i am aware of include:
* kde4support
* khtml
* kjs
* kjsembed
* krunner
there are a few others that are imho borderline cases (kmediaplay
On Sunday, March 16, 2014 11:43:12 David Faure wrote:
> There's a middle ground between "actively maintain" and "we made it
> completely impossible to even fix one bug".
at which point the person(s) doing the bug fixes can take on the project an
handle releases. it is free software: people can fo
On Saturday 15 March 2014 16:59:54 Kevin Ottens wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> This week, Aaron brought to my attention (thx!) that we would be releasing
> 5.0 with modules which would be immediately deprecated. Indeed that's a
> potential maintenance and messaging problem.
Do you have a list of such mo
On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Kevin Ottens wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> This week, Aaron brought to my attention (thx!) that we would be releasing
> 5.0
> with modules which would be immediately deprecated. Indeed that's a
> potential
> maintenance and messaging problem.
> Also, to make things wors
Hello all,
This week, Aaron brought to my attention (thx!) that we would be releasing 5.0
with modules which would be immediately deprecated. Indeed that's a potential
maintenance and messaging problem.
Also, to make things worse, it looks like it makes the definition of Tier 4
harder. I know D
36 matches
Mail list logo
