16:04:54 #startmeeting - KDE SIG Meeting -- http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE/Meetings/2009-06-23 16:05:21 who's present today? 16:05:28 Present. 16:05:46 * SMParrish_ here 16:05:51 Kevin_Kofler, gratulaion! 16:06:09 * jreznik is here 16:06:20 * ltinkl present 16:06:20 * than is here 16:06:40 than: here afterall ? 16:06:52 no, that is not than 16:06:55 ^^ 16:06:58 i'm just half here 16:07:29 First, off, congratulations to Kevin_Kofler for being elected to FESCo 16:07:40 aye, congrats 16:07:44 congrat! 16:07:49 gratz from me as well Kevin 16:08:00 #info Kevin_Kofler elected to FESCo, any issues to bring up in the FESCo meeting? 16:08:21 I'll skip forward to the related item in the agenda. 16:08:56 #topic Kevin_Kofler elected to FESCo, any issues to bring up in the FESCo meeting? 16:08:58 there. 16:09:25 FYI, the FESCo meeting is on Friday, so you have 3 days to think of stuff. :-) 16:10:10 I'd like to prepare another feature page for F12 and KDE 4.3, but there's lot of time before it reach FESCo meeting 16:10:23 Don't worry, there will be more meetings. :-) 16:10:32 :) 16:11:17 In any case, from the election results, it like quite some people are fed up with the GNOME tyranny. 16:11:49 are the exact results out already? 16:12:09 now now, please focus on bringing people together, working together, collaboration. that kind of talk is a wee bit divisive 16:12:11 Kevin_Kofler: not to jump in, but I think you've got your head up you ass with that statement. 16:12:19 Yes, check fedora-announce 16:12:42 Full results: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-announce-list/2009-June/msg00015.html 16:13:55 bpepple: that's another way to put it. point taken. 16:14:05 I got 48% of the achievable score, or the equivalent of 148.09 people voting full points (which also means at least 149 people gave me a non-zero score). 16:14:33 rdieter: sorry to butt in, but I hate that see kind of KDe/GNOME sentiment. gets my blood boiling. ;) 16:14:42 anyway, back to work, 16:14:43 bpepple: +1! 16:15:21 it's chance for us to be more involved in fedora development 16:15:22 next topic... 16:15:47 #topic RPM Macros for packaging, http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE/PackagingCleanup#Macros 16:16:19 initially, seems a bit over the top, macro'izing everything and the kitchen sink, but I think there's value to be had in there somewhere. :) 16:16:36 I think we should have macros for the common directories. 16:17:01 Especially because they might in principle change (though it's unlikely they will, due to backwards compatibility concerns). 16:17:19 The list at the link comes from MathStuf. 16:17:40 I'm torn, yeah. Now that things have stabilized, part of me wants to go the other direction, and try to minimize kde-specific macros. 16:18:14 anyway, how about we through this at the ml's, for further discussion, and see where it goes. 16:18:36 For the KDE 3 mimelnk dir: "KDE3; why do KDE4 apps still use this" - I guess for those remaining kdelibs3 apps. 16:18:54 Yes, that's kde3 only 16:18:57 having those macros in place is handy, alto it means a lot of work for us to clean up the .spec files 16:19:01 But I don't think we have kdelibs3 file managers anymore now that Krusader is KDE 4. 16:19:26 ltinkl: that's a concern too. 16:19:53 but I guess it's worth the effort in the end 16:21:11 I'll ask MathStuf to take it to the lists then, agreed? 16:21:56 Yes. 16:21:57 ok 16:21:57 * ltinkl brb 16:22:24 #action MathStuf to take http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE/PackagingCleanup#Macros to mailing lists for further discussion 16:22:56 #topic critical path packages - does it affect us? should it? how? 16:23:08 fyi, http://skvidal.wordpress.com/2009/06/22/critical-path-packages/ 16:23:34 I've put this up after noticing KDE packages are notoriously absent from his list. 16:23:41 being at the FAD that came up with that idea, I'm naturally ok with it. 16:23:46 So I wonder what our position on this should be. 16:24:06 the point is, these are pkg's that have higher scrutiny release, qa, testing -wise. 16:24:08 it should be great for lot of low level packages to avoid totally breakage like dbus issue 16:24:37 So, from a selfish point of view, not being on that list means less work. :) 16:24:37 While I don't think we need more bureucracy hindering our updates, as history has shown it not to be needed, having GNOME on the list and KDE not means we're once against second-class citizens. 16:24:44 So I have mixed feelings about this. 16:25:01 well, Gnome packages shouldn't be part of that list imo 16:25:01 but I dont think we want kde on the list 16:25:33 we have lot of eyes on updates-testing 16:25:34 well, one of the "use case" items as part of the critical path was "login", "do updates" 16:25:45 The rationale for including a GUI is that if the GUI is broken, end users are really stuck. 16:26:09 It's not just that they don't necessarily know how to use the terminal, it's that they don't even know how to get to runlevel 3. 16:26:34 but we really want KDE SIG member in that group... so he can stop updates which are wounding us 16:26:50 jreznik: +1 16:27:18 currenty, the signoff group includes releng and qa. I'm in releng, if that makes anyone feel better. 16:27:45 I think some work is really needed on GRUB usability. Our proprietary competition has ways to get to a command prompt or a "repair console" depending on the version, Fedora could easily offer that (it's what runlevel 3 is for). 16:28:01 But that's outside of our (KDE SIG's) scope. 16:29:27 A related topic is that we could really use a QA (as in testing - triaging is already covered by SMParrish_) volunteer. 16:29:48 Right now, testing is done either by developers or by users who just step in to test something once. 16:29:54 We don't have dedicated testers. 16:31:11 good idea. 16:32:15 #help volunteers to help qa kde-related items 16:32:46 but first we need to set what we want to test 16:33:02 list of MUST be checked etc... 16:34:14 any volunteers to start on such a checklist of qa items? It can be a work-in-progress of course. 16:35:07 test plan would be nice for feature page test plan either 16:35:37 Can we really come up with a systematic plan to test the entire KDE desktop? 16:35:41 I don't think it's possible. 16:35:58 that's a huge and long term task indeed 16:35:59 Basic QA is just "try to use the desktop and report any breakage you notice". 16:36:00 It doesn't have to be exhaustive initially (or ever) 16:36:27 but at least targetting some common use-cases would be a good start 16:36:47 Kevin_Kofler: but there should be something like test this, this and this as these are crucial parts of desktop 16:36:55 And usually there'll be something specific to test for the update (e.g. "does WPA in kde-plasma-nm work?" for a kde-plasma-nm update, "do Python plasmoids work without python-devel installed?" for my recent kdebindings fix etc.). 16:38:04 right, stuff fixed by updates, can include tests/checks for regressions 16:38:49 it'll be a (long) journey, with no real final destination. 16:39:11 alright, I'll bite this one, and come up with some initial ideas. 16:39:33 #topic sharing brand with upstream 16:39:37 jreznik: any news/progress? 16:40:25 rdieter: I talked to pinheiro 16:40:49 and sent some mails to fedora-kde/design list 16:41:00 mostly it's about sharing 16:41:04 not replacing fedora brand 16:41:13 but I'm skeptic about schedules... :( 16:41:23 So far, the only feedback we got from the Fedora Design Team was from Máirín Duffy and it was negative. 16:41:45 Kevin_Kofler: and from Nicu and it was mostly negative 16:42:00 I asked pinheiro to contact them directly 16:42:04 I haven't seen that one, I guess he only sent it to the design list, not the KDE one. 16:42:15 Kevin_Kofler: it's possible, check design list 16:42:20 I think the negatively is mostly in the form of not knowing exactly what the process will be yet 16:42:34 indeed 16:43:03 it'll be a learning process for everyone involved, but I (still) strongly believe it will be a worthwhile one 16:43:04 Máirín's objections are basically 2: 1. they're worried about schedule pressure and 2. she doesn't like the idea of KDE-specific themes. 16:43:13 everyone switch to defence mode when you want more work from him :D 16:43:44 The schedule issue is an open point of contention and it seems communication is also lacking. 16:43:47 2. is that really an issue? The artwork team hasn't really helped make any kde themes to date, why is this any different? am I missing something? 16:43:52 with new proposed schedules by martin sourada it seems more possible 16:44:20 It seems the Design Team's position is that the schedules are fine, only F11 was particularly late, but the lateness in F7 to F10 was normal. 16:44:46 On the other hand, we basically agreed in past meetings that we need their output much earlier. 16:44:46 interesting. really? normal? ouchie. 16:45:19 we're are mostly on our own so any help from upstream is great for us I think 16:45:31 well, ok, once we have a Release name, and some initial theming ideas, I assume this process can start to move forward. 16:45:35 I'd like to try it even it means more work 16:45:41 jreznik: +1 16:46:12 opensuse and kubuntu are joining too 16:46:25 #action jreznik to continue as liason between fedora-art team and upsream kde art folks in "sharing branding" 16:46:53 #topic Fedora 12 KDE 4.3 feature page 16:47:19 ok, again for me - than asked me to prepare feature page 16:47:23 totally +1 for this, helps the marketing/qa machine, if nothing else. 16:47:33 I guess jreznik with my help will create this page 16:47:42 thanks guys 16:47:45 jreznik: About the artwork stuff: Sure that offloading work to upstream could in principle mean less work for us, but I'm not convinced that it will really mean that. 16:47:56 what we want to market as great feature for 4.3/12? 16:48:05 I think it just means we'll have some stale KDE 4.3 look elements in our 4.4 and 4.5 updates. :-( 16:48:10 2 items worth mentioning: polkit-1 and Solid/DeviceKit 16:49:00 About the 4.3 feature page: my main issue with those feature pages is that we advertise something as a "new feature" in F12 when it'll have been out as an F11 update for months already. 16:49:41 Kevin_Kofler: true in part, but it's still good for marketting, esp for the "new" items ltinkl mentioned 16:49:42 ltinkl: The thing is, mentioning items with nobody working on implementing them is not of much use. 16:49:54 ha :) 16:49:56 Kevin_Kofler: *we* are (well, ltinkl and jreznik ) 16:50:15 Is anybody working on DeviceKit support in Solid yet? 16:50:22 I already have a working Solid-DeviceKit 16:50:38 http://websvn.kde.org/branches/work/solid-devicekit/ 16:50:52 and jreznik committed the polkit-1-qt port 16:50:53 I'm not sure it's time to mention polkit-qt-1... it's really first tryout 16:51:09 http://websvn.kde.org/branches/work/polkit-qt-1/ 16:51:34 so we should really advertise something we have worked hard on :) 16:52:34 I assume this work will be targetted for kde-4.4 ? (other?) 16:52:43 yup, that's the plan 16:52:53 upstream kde-4.4 that is, we'll want to include/use it asap of course 16:53:00 But we can backport it, we'll basically have to backport the PolicyKit stuff. 16:53:14 once KDE 4.3 has been released, the trunk opens for 4.4 development and we merge our work branches back 16:53:29 coolness. anything else feature-page related? 16:53:30 yup and we, as in Fedora-KDE, can backport it 16:53:31 I hope it's stuff for 4.4 16:53:34 How well does Solid-DeviceKit work? And what kind of devices does it support? 16:53:50 Long term, only the daemons for disks and power management are here to stay. 16:53:57 Kevin_Kofler: works pretty fine, but supports only Disks and PowerManagement so far 16:54:00 We're supposed to use libudev for tasks like device enumeration. 16:54:28 Kevin_Kofler: not really, details after the meeting, long story :) 16:54:38 The main (not -disks nor -power) DeviceKit daemon is deprecated (at least according to blog posts I found). 16:55:15 So if we design for that one, we'll be stuck again. :-( 16:55:24 But we can discuss this in #fedora-kde. 16:55:43 yup 16:55:53 I think that's it for the agenda (unless I missed something). 16:56:00 #topic open discussion 16:56:15 gcds? 16:56:25 anyone going to gran canaria? 16:56:48 http://www.grancanariadesktopsummit.org 16:56:49 sadly, not I this time. 16:57:22 rdieter: still doing FUDCon Berlin? 16:57:28 something what can I do for us there? 16:57:29 secondary issue, for any ev'er who *is* going, interesting is proxy'ing for me? 16:57:32 jreznik is going, so direct any questions/queries towards KDE developers to him :) 16:57:38 SMParrish_: no 16:59:59 #topic gran caria summit 17:00:05 #link http://www.grancanariadesktopsummit.org 17:00:24 looks like time is out for today, thanks all 17:00:41 #endmeeting