From kde-pim Thu Jan 08 19:36:30 2009 From: Kevin Krammer Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2009 19:36:30 +0000 To: kde-pim Subject: Re: [Kde-pim] Message-Id: <200901082036.35323.kevin.krammer () gmx ! at> X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-pim&m=123144346121940 MIME-Version: 1 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--===============0984271898==" --===============0984271898== Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart3506143.jz5nVVftXz"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --nextPart3506143.jz5nVVftXz Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Thursday 08 January 2009, Volker Krause wrote: > On Thursday 08 January 2009 18:24:21 Kevin Krammer wrote: > > On Thursday 08 January 2009, Volker Krause wrote: > > > On Thursday 08 January 2009 16:49:31 Tom Albers wrote: > > > > /me scratches head... > > > > > > > > Did I miss a memo? > > > > > > I'm wondering the same... > > > > I am actually not suprised very much. > > They have probably been working very hard to find suitable phrasing > > of "reasons". > > > > > Would have been nice if those "various people" would talk to us about > > > their "number of concerns" :-/ > > > > Looking at the other items I'd say that there are actually no substanti= al > > reasons (otherwise they would have been mentioned), but rather an attem= pt > > to "save face" in the light of almost a year of delay while at the same > > time being vague enought to not shed any bad light on us. > > Well, that didn't work at all then. The whole process certainly confirms > predjudices against fd.o and since we don't have concrete issues to argue > against it sheds a bad light on us at least for the casual observers who > don't know the whole background. Well, true, but after months of inactivity their choice have become rather= =20 limited. IMHO the "reject" is probably the best possible outcome, since further limb= o=20 would not have helped anything either and I am afraid that an "accept" at=20 that amount of delay would probably have meant that we would ignore it out = of=20 considerations how any such future delays would affect the project's=20 capabilities to control its own development. > > I guess I could have closed it myself saying that we came to an agreeme= nt > > with KDE to provide the infrastructure since this is such an important > > project for the Free Software desktop. > > Which might have given the impression that we are longer interested in > making Akonadi a cross-desktop project... True, good point! > Anyway, it never really was about infrastructure, we have an excellent one > in KDE, but about making it clear to everyone that Akonadi is intended to > be a cross-desktop project, not something only for KDE. Right > > I am consider to writing a blog entry explaining that fdo hosting is > > basically provided for projects which cannot easily get access to one of > > the desktop projects' infrastructures. > > That's not fully true IMHO, that would imply that projects currently host= ed > on fd.o (eg. D-Bus and poppler) would not have gotten access to KDE > infrastructure, which is not true. Yes, correct, though that or basically an explicit request to move to=20 a "neutral" hoster are actually the only reasons to do host there. Initially the idea behind fd.o hosting might have been different, but both= =20 GNOME and KDE infrastructure and admins are way more reliable. > > Probably should do this right away to avoid having somebody else blog > > about it negatively. > > I can't say I could blame anyone for doing that, but then I don't know the > full story myself yet. Also true, however I believe that calming the storm is way more hassle than= =20 trying to prevent it in the first place. Those who want can still point fingers but I hope my kind of optimistic int= ial=20 response can keep it at a sane level. And probably helps to get to know the actual reasons before anyone decides = it=20 is better to hide behin the offical ones. Cheers, Kevin =2D-=20 Kevin Krammer, KDE developer, xdg-utils developer KDE user support, developer mentoring --nextPart3506143.jz5nVVftXz Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBJZlW+nKMhG6pzZJIRAnTmAJ98nO+QrNdP4/I/uWNCdXquDj9KKACeOc0u Px+nyVITrnBH1067w/qyri8= =6wes -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart3506143.jz5nVVftXz-- --===============0984271898== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ KDE PIM mailing list kde-pim@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-pim KDE PIM home page at http://pim.kde.org/ --===============0984271898==--