14:06:30 #startmeeting KDE SIG Meeting -- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE/Meetings/2010-02-16 14:06:30 Meeting started Tue Feb 16 14:06:30 2010 UTC. The chair is rdieter. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:06:31 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 14:06:50 #chair Kevin_Kofler than_ jreznik ltinkl SMParrish 14:06:51 Current chairs: Kevin_Kofler SMParrish jreznik ltinkl rdieter than_ 14:07:00 #topic Init 14:07:06 who's present today? 14:07:11 #meetingname kde-sig 14:07:12 The meeting name has been set to 'kde-sig' 14:07:15 Present. 14:07:16 * SMParrish here 14:07:17 present 14:07:32 * mefoster here 14:07:33 * thomasj here 14:08:00 here 14:08:02 * ltinkl is here 14:08:26 #topic qtwebkit jit/selinux problem: update 14:08:38 any news on the qtwebkit jit/selinux thing ? 14:09:03 * than is present 14:09:46 None that I know of. 14:10:02 -disable-javascript-jit is the only solution at the moment (and what we're using). 14:10:12 someone should ask probably someone :D 14:10:33 as it affects my package, should be probably me 14:10:35 webkitgtk also disables the JS JIT for the same reason. 14:11:43 OK, I'd propose opening a tracker bug, preferably linked with an upstream report. 14:12:13 Bonus points for contacting anyone we know @ qt/nokia to try to get the issue some visibility 14:12:14 Tracker bug for WebKit in general, with clones against qt and webkitgtk? 14:12:49 good question, I was thinking more about qt/webkit, as that's what concerns us most, but we could generalize the effort too 14:12:54 BTW, as far as Qt is concerned, this now also affects QtScript. 14:13:12 oh ick 14:13:23 (But up to 4.5 Qt went along without a JIT for QtScript just fine too.) 14:13:31 Really, the JIT is not a required feature. 14:13:38 But sure, it'd be nice to have it working. 14:13:46 sounds good to cooperate the effort with gtk guys 14:13:48 (better performance) 14:14:24 That said, I'd want it enabled on x86_64 too, not sure what the status there is. 14:14:30 jreznik: you willing to take the torch and lead the efforts here? 14:14:49 rdieter: ok 14:14:50 As for webkitgtk, it's the same JIT with the same issues, so it'll need the same fix. 14:14:58 yes 14:15:19 * jreznik is addind webkit issue to his todo 14:15:21 #action jreznik to lead efforts to improve webkit jit/selinux situation 14:16:09 thanks. 14:16:21 anything else? or can we move on ? 14:16:33 move on 14:16:56 #topic #565420: akonadi kcm not shown in systemsettings 14:17:06 .bug 565420 14:17:08 rdieter: Bug 565420 akonadi kcm not shown in systemsettings - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=565420 14:17:26 So the summary is that svahl noticed this went AWOL and users would no doubt notice it too. 14:17:36 with kdepim-runtime-4.4.0, upstream decided to hide the akonadi-related kcm's... 14:17:46 And unlike svahl, the average user is unlikely to figure out the magic "kcmshell4 kcm_akonadi" incantation. 14:18:08 rdieter: is there any reason why upstream want to hide it? 14:18:10 Right, upstream decided to hide the stuff. I have a patch to bring them back and I think that's really the right thing to do. 14:18:22 than: They think people don't need it. :-/ 14:18:23 than: I'm sure they have their reason(s). 14:18:24 But it's not true. 14:18:45 repeating than, was there any reason provided by upstream why they wanted to hide those KCMs? 14:18:48 rdieter: "Users should not need it" is the reason given in the commit message, but it's not true, they do need it. 14:18:51 it's still available in krunner, but I didnt found it in the menu 14:18:56 Kevin_Kofler: hm, it's not good reason! 14:19:02 Kevin_Kofler wanted to revert the change, which I'm not necessarily against, but I also think before doing so in any release, we should contact them for their justification/rationale for doing so. 14:19:03 than: +1 14:19:28 KDE is becoming more and more like GNOME. :-( 14:19:31 unless I see a valid reason, I'm for showing (reenabling) them 14:19:40 The option is already under "Advanced user settings". 14:19:45 I agree with than, I dont like someone else deciding what I do and do not need. +1 to implement the patch and add it back 14:19:47 which is ok imho 14:20:22 So we have me, than, ltinkl, SMParrish, svahl agreeing that the KCM should be shown, right? 14:20:38 +1 here (maybe contact upstream first) 14:21:09 count /me +1! 14:21:10 I have a (2-line) patch in Rawhide already, I'll build it for F11/F12 too. 14:22:30 svahl: yes, we should ask upstream for real reason 14:22:47 Who is going to do that? 14:23:04 with prepared use cases why it's needed 14:23:11 jreznik: Right. 14:23:14 Good point. 14:23:40 Do you volunteer? :-) 14:23:40 ltinkl: could you please check with upstream? 14:23:45 than: ok 14:23:54 ltinkl: great, thanks 14:24:29 #action ltinkl to contactd kdepim upstream about the decision/rationale behind hiding akonadi kcm's 14:24:48 But in the meantime we should show it! 14:25:00 Kevin_Kofler: I agree, let's do it 14:25:24 #agreed We will show the Akonadi KCM in System Settings in Fedora (at least for now). 14:26:46 that's all we had on the agenda today 14:26:47 So, I think we're through with the agenda, right? 14:26:52 #topic Open Discussion 14:26:56 yep 14:26:57 FYI: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE/KDE_4.4.0_update_set#proposed_changes_to_pull_in 14:27:21 I've collected the changes which missed the current update set (which just got pushed). 14:27:37 the kdelibs/kdepim-runtime stuff is pretty much a no-brainer for inclusion. 14:27:44 how do we want to handle qt-4.6.2 ? 14:27:46 I think it's fairly straightforward we want those. 14:28:03 I'd include 4.6.2 in the next testing push. 14:28:24 Remember how Aaron said 4.6.2 has important fixes we should get out ASAP? 14:28:25 fwiw, qt-4.6.2 is in kde-unstable repo for now. I'd urge folks to test it. 14:28:53 we probably want it asap 14:29:02 hrm... right. 14:29:17 k, I'll move it to kde-testing for a wider audience. 14:29:27 and we can probably include it in the next updates-testing batch 14:29:42 I'm syncing and building kdepim-runtime. 14:29:57 rdieter: we should move 4.6.2 to testing first 14:30:17 yep, testing 14:30:32 than: Of course we're going to testing, not stable, there. 14:30:38 This is all part of the 4.4.0 update group. 14:32:46 i will prefer, we will move 4.4.0 first in stable without 4.6.2 14:33:49 let it 1 week in testing, if we don't get any bad feedback, we can move 4.6.2 in stable 14:34:24 we still need some more time for 4.4, so why not test it together? 14:34:36 then we will need another testing period 14:34:44 (if we wait) 14:35:26 Yeah, KDE 4.4.0 is not ready for stable! 14:35:37 We should test them together. 14:35:39 there's pros/cons to each. How about we see how kde-testing feedback goes over the next few days, and re-evaluate then. 14:35:49 KDE upstream (at least aseigo) recommends to ship 4.6.2 over 4.6.1. 14:35:58 Many bugfixes there. 14:36:05 I think it's a bad idea to push 4.6.1! 14:36:21 I'd lean toward testing kde44/qt-4.6.2 together too 14:36:27 it's better to test with 4.6.2 even it means longer testing period 14:36:28 rdieter: I think it'd be better to get it into updates-testing at the same time. 14:36:28 Kevin_Kofler: we care about regessions in 4.6.2 14:36:48 than: We also care about regressions in 4.6.1 which 4.6.2 fixes. :-) 14:36:59 It's likely these are more. 14:37:09 And the best way to find 4.6.2 regressions is to have it in testing. 14:37:27 * thomasj likes the idea 4.4/4.6.2 14:37:28 (right now, not after 4.4.0 is stable) 14:37:41 I agree test them together 14:37:51 yup, put them together into testing 14:38:30 these concerns are why I was suggesting delaying any 4.6.2 decisions for 2-3 days. It'll probably be that long before we get another good updates push anyway. 14:39:11 rdieter: i agree with rex 14:40:50 I don't think delaying is useful. 14:40:54 I honestly think we'll end up pushing 440/462 together anyway, but this gives us the flexiblity to stay with 461 in the event of any nastiness we find over the next couple of days 14:41:02 We want 4.6.2 out, the sooner we get it into the update set, the better. 14:41:04 It doesn't hurt to wait 2-3 days more. But 4.4/4.6.2 testing together, would be nice. 14:41:30 fyi, 462 is in kde-testing now. 14:41:41 * thomasj installing currently 14:41:45 Kevin_Kofler: we can wait 2-3 days :) 14:42:04 speaking of the kde repos, heffer was kind enough to offer a new de-based mirror. 14:42:17 I'll be adding that to the mirror lists soon 14:46:33 looks like things got quiet, are we done for today? 14:47:40 #info will delay decision on what to do with qt-4.6.3 for 2-3 days 14:48:01 #info will have a new de-based mirror for kde repos soon 14:48:17 alright then, thanks everybody. 14:48:19 #endmeeting