On Wednesday 21 August 2013 13:00:26 Jos Poortvliet wrote: > On Wednesday 21 August 2013 10:59:29 Mario Fux KDE ML wrote: > > Am Mittwoch 21 August 2013, 09.14:58 schrieb Michael Zanetti: > > > > Morning Michael > > > > Thanks for your and Albert's explanations. > > > > > On Tuesday 20 August 2013 22:11:04 Jos Poortvliet wrote: > > > > On Friday 16 August 2013 10:49:26 Jos Poortvliet wrote: > > > > > I think Aaron already made clear that he would be happy to work on > > > > > sharing as much as possible with the Plasma efforts he's involved in > > > > > and kick folk around him to do the same. I just make the wild bet > > > > > that > > > > > the Frameworks folk are perfectly open to the same - standards > > > > > benefit > > > > > us all, so does sharing libraries. They are turning KDE Libraries > > > > > into > > > > > components which are > > > > > separately useful, that sounds like a terribly useful think for > > > > > Ubuntu > > > > > Phone. > > > > > > > > So I get plenty of replies in no time all over that I'm wrong, but > > > > when > > > > I > > > > offer help and ask how we can actually do something constructive, > > > > there's > > > > only silence? If the Canonical folks on this list don't feel like this > > > > mail was directed at them - you're hereby corrected. If you don't feel > > > > like there is anything you can do, please say so, we can then discuss > > > > trying to talk to somebody at Canonical directly. > > > > > > I think for collaboration it takes more than just KDE and Canonical > > > having > > > some similar stuff to do: > > > > > > - Not all areas can be shared. I for one work on Unity8, which just > > > works > > > and looks so different in every way than plasma does. We don't need > > > Plasmoid containers, you don't need search scopes. Given that Ubuntu > > > Touch > > > is QML only, there's not much point in pulling the QWidget related stuff > > > from KF5 over to Ubuntu. Other things, like the Solid base for example > > > might indeed could be shared/reused. > > > > > > - Once there is something which might make sense to be shared, it > > > requires > > > the exact people working on it having interest in collaborating. Which > > > means, the responsive KDE person needs to accept that a certain API > > > needs > > > to change for requirements NOT needed by KDE and the responsive person > > > in > > > Canonical needs to have interest in pulling in something that most > > > likely > > > can do way more than Ubuntu needs at this stage, with the additional > > > efforts of maintaining more code and doing code reviews for stuff not > > > even > > > needed. It is not possible for me or Albert to go to some API guys and > > > tell them: You have to share code with KDE. This needs to happen from > > > inside the team. The person doing the work must drive it. > > > > > > Now, coming from the Gnome/Gtk area, Canonical's people mostly are aware > > > what code could be shared with Gnome, but not many of them have a clue > > > what KDE frameworks actually is. Same the other way round. I'm quite > > > sure > > > very few here know how the Ubuntu's architecture is built up. > > > > So here my two questions: > > - What could we do that this "Gnome/GTK Canonical people" would be better > > informed about KDE Frameworks? I think subscribing to the ubuntu-phone mailing list and just start following what people are doing. Seeing what people are working on, ideas where stuff could be shared should pop up on its own I guess. Starting to package up the libs that start to become usable might be a good thing too. But in the end, building showcases is always the best I'd say. How about porting some KDE apps to Ubuntu Touch? Doing a good job there would definitely draw attention to it. Especially at this point in time where every new app still gets like 5 blog posts dedicated to it. Doesn't even need to do some real thing. Already demos of how to use some K goodness would help I think. > > I mean, it would be possible to do a hangout or create a presentation or > video on where they can find stuff 'for grabs'. As I pointed out before, I > think it's good for Canonical to grab stuff from our repo's - it's GPL and > all free. If they don't have time (now) to send patches, that is fine. > Perhaps they have time later, maybe not - but by them just USING code we > wrote, we're building up a relationship with them, and creating a > reputation of being a repository of cool-stuff-to-grab. That can lead to > collaboration in the future. > > In other words, again, I'd like to emphasize: it is totally understandable > that Canonical has no time to collaborate, send patches upstream etcetera > right now. Just copy the code, use it, fix the API's for your own internal > use, and see later on if we can collaborate. If not, you've forked it - > fine, you at least didn't have to write it yourself. If we can bring it > together again, awesome, points for both of us. > > Catch my drift? I'm not demanding here that Canonical has to invest in > collaboration. I want them to start stealing as much as possible. I simply > believe that the way Free Software works will be an incentive for them to > collaborate and contribute IN THE FUTURE. No pressure needed. > > And as bonus, if they use a mention-worthy portion of our code I'll trow in > my time for promoting Ubuntu Phone. All free, both code and my time. That's > the case I'd like to be made to Ubuntu management here: you don't have to > do anything. Take our code, use it, get your product out. And we'll help > you promote it and say nice things about you, because we're happy to see > our code being used. That's it. No strings attached. I'd like to repeat that neither Albert nor me are part of the management > > /J > > (ps and no, kmail, when I say "no strings attached", that doesn't mean I > have to attach a file now :D) /me still likes that feature Cheers, Michael _______________________________________________ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community