14:01:19 <rdieter> #startmeeting kde-sig -- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE/Meetings/2010-04-06 14:01:20 <zodbot> Meeting started Tue Apr 6 14:01:19 2010 UTC. The chair is rdieter. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:01:22 <rdieter> #meetingname kde-sig 14:01:22 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 14:01:25 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'kde-sig' 14:01:32 <rdieter> #topic roll call 14:01:36 <rdieter> who's present today 14:01:38 <rdieter> ? 14:01:50 <SMParrish_mobile> Here but at work. So in and out 14:02:08 * jreznik is here 14:02:28 <ltinkl> I'm here, although I have to leave early today 14:02:43 <Kevin_Kofler> Present. 14:02:53 * than is present 14:03:04 <rdieter> #chair than Kevin_Kofler ltinkl jreznik SMParrish_mobile 14:03:04 <zodbot> Current chairs: Kevin_Kofler SMParrish_mobile jreznik ltinkl rdieter than 14:03:12 <rdieter> short agenda, hopefully won't take long today 14:03:17 <rdieter> #topic kde-4.4.2 14:03:36 <rdieter> looks like we've got all (most?) of kde-4.4.2 built , and in kde-testing repos 14:03:52 <rdieter> who wants to be the kde-4.4.2 update wrangler this time around? 14:04:35 <Kevin_Kofler> rdieter: I added 2 more items to the agenda, as I mentioned before on #fedora-kde. 14:04:55 <rdieter> Kevin_Kofler: ok 14:04:56 <Kevin_Kofler> For 4.4.2, have we gotten kdepim-runtime through? 14:05:03 <rdieter> yes 14:05:05 <Kevin_Kofler> There were some build failures on Sunday. 14:05:15 <rdieter> I requeue'd them, and it went fine (wierd?) 14:05:20 <than> Kevin_Kofler: what was the problem? 14:05:32 <than> it built fine in f13 14:05:42 <Kevin_Kofler> Some bizarre error with Nepomuk/Akonadi integration which went away after a resubmit. 14:05:50 <than> ah ok 14:06:10 <Kevin_Kofler> BTW, in kdepim, upstream disabled the Nepomuk emailfeeder due to build errors, it might also be something like that. 14:06:16 <Kevin_Kofler> I wonder if we should try reenabling it. 14:06:22 <Kevin_Kofler> It always built for us before. 14:06:39 <Kevin_Kofler> (I noticed it due to a directory vanishing from the file list.) 14:06:56 <rdieter> Kevin_Kofler: I'd ask them first before doing anything 14:07:03 <rdieter> (or just leave it as-is) 14:08:00 <Kevin_Kofler> I can take care of the 4.4.2 update, I did the previous one, so I know how to do things (query Koji for the full list of builds, tag the stuff into the updates-candidate tags, then fill in Bodhi requests). 14:08:54 <rdieter> Kevin_Kofler: thanks 14:09:12 <rdieter> #action Kevin_Kofler to serve as update wrangler for kde-4.4.2 14:09:32 <rdieter> #topic koffice-2.2 for f13 14:09:40 <Kevin_Kofler> Anything outside of the kde441 tags I should pull in? 14:09:44 <Kevin_Kofler> konq-plugins, I guess. 14:09:46 <Kevin_Kofler> Anything else? 14:10:04 <rdieter> Kevin_Kofler: that should be it 14:10:15 * thomasj_ here 14:10:37 <rdieter> thomasj_: hi! 14:10:42 <than> Kevin_Kofler: konq-plugins is only one that needs to be included 14:10:53 <Kevin_Kofler> OK 14:10:53 <thomasj_> Hello 14:11:14 <Kevin_Kofler> So re KOffice, I think we should ship 2.2. 14:11:23 <Kevin_Kofler> (as already said last week) 14:11:58 <rdieter> 2.2 testing/feedback so far has been good. 14:12:12 <than> Kevin_Kofler: do we really want to ship koffice beta in f13? 14:12:15 <rdieter> we helped get a *bunch* of fixes/crashers in and upstreamed since beta1 14:12:25 <rdieter> beta2 includes all the fixes 14:12:43 <rdieter> beta2 is in kde-unstable repo now, for further testing 14:12:49 <rdieter> I'll be doing f13 builds here shortly 14:13:05 <Kevin_Kofler> AIUI, it's a lot better than 2.1 and it's close to the final release. 14:13:22 <jreznik> yep 14:13:22 <rdieter> Kevin_Kofler: +1, I agree, by all accounts, it's looking good alright 14:13:34 <jreznik> it's a lot better than 2.1 but still unusable 14:13:49 <Kevin_Kofler> And Kexi is back. If we ship 2.1, we lose Kexi (unless we package the KOffice 1 version, but ugh). 14:13:58 <than> still unusable is not good! 14:14:03 <Kevin_Kofler> Speaking of KOffice 1 stuff, I still need to look into packaging Kivio, but it's a bit of a mess. 14:14:17 <thomasj_> It is usable, just the MS stuff import isn't good. 14:14:18 <jreznik> than: as 2.1 14:14:25 <Kevin_Kofler> jreznik: Are you sure it's unusable? 14:14:27 <thomasj_> But it never was 14:14:43 <jreznik> Kevin_Kofler: yes, even for usual office tasks 14:14:45 <Kevin_Kofler> And is it worse than 1.6? 14:15:07 <jreznik> 2.2 is still worse than 1.6 but much more better than 2.1 14:15:09 <Kevin_Kofler> 1.6 wasn't that great either. Try doing charts with KSpread and you'll see bugs all over the place, completely unusable. 14:15:21 <jreznik> for real work - oo :( 14:15:23 <rdieter> jreznik: ok, I'll add some import/export tasks to our koffice test plans 14:15:29 <jreznik> and oo is really very buggy 14:15:49 <jreznik> but I hope we'll get nice office solution soon 14:16:08 <jreznik> just try to create simple table (only simple is possible) and reopen it 14:16:10 <rdieter> fyi, http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE/KOffice_test_plan 14:16:44 <rdieter> jreznik: feel free to add test-cases too (like table save/reopen you mentioned) 14:16:54 <jreznik> it's better than 2.1 - it sometimes opened table without data, now there are no table borders but data visible ;-) just for example 14:16:57 <jreznik> rdieter: ok 14:17:14 <jreznik> if we are going to ship 2.1 then it's better to ship 2.2 14:17:25 <jreznik> we can hope for release candidate 14:17:28 <than> does someone know when koffice 2.2 will be released? 14:17:41 * rdieter looks for the release schedule 14:18:29 <rdieter> http://wiki.koffice.org/index.php?title=Schedules/KOffice/2.2/Release_Plan 14:18:47 <rdieter> rc1 Tagging on April, 23rd 2010 14:19:14 <Kevin_Kofler> RC1 will probably not make it, realistically. 14:19:20 <Kevin_Kofler> An intermediate snapshot, maybe. 14:19:42 <rdieter> if they stick to schedule, it's doable 14:19:46 <jreznik> it's in quite good condition right now... better than previous betas 14:20:07 <rdieter> final freeze is 05-04 for f13 14:20:26 <jreznik> rdieter: us format? :D 14:20:36 <rdieter> yes, sorry, May 04 :) 14:20:52 <rdieter> (not yesterday) 14:20:58 <than> it seems we could get rc1 in f13 14:21:15 <jreznik> if we can get at least rc1 - I'm +1 14:21:35 <rdieter> jreznik: if not, what's your prefered alternative ? 14:22:27 * thomasj_ is for 2.2, if beta or RC, we update it to final anyways. 14:22:50 <jreznik> then I'm +0.75 but with more beta testing 14:22:57 <Kevin_Kofler> Oh indeed, the F13 slip makes RC1 doable. 14:23:29 <Kevin_Kofler> +1 for 2.2 here. 14:23:29 <rdieter> ok, let's tentatively move forward with the plan to ship with 2.2, continuing our current active testing 14:24:08 <rdieter> anything else? can we move on? 14:25:03 <rdieter> #topic split out libmediastreamer subpackages from linphone 14:25:07 <rdieter> see also bug #490046 14:25:20 <rdieter> .bug 490046 14:25:21 <zodbot> rdieter: Bug 490046 linphone: Update to 3.x.x? - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490046 14:25:44 <Kevin_Kofler> So F13 and Rawhide now has Linphone 3. 14:25:53 <Kevin_Kofler> libmediastreamer is part of that. 14:25:58 <Kevin_Kofler> But it's not split into subpackages. 14:26:11 <Kevin_Kofler> We need libmediastreamer and libmediastreamer-devel subpackages for Kopete. 14:26:30 <rdieter> so we'd be pulling in extra stuff we don't need ? 14:26:41 <Kevin_Kofler> That and there's no devel package. 14:26:51 <Kevin_Kofler> The library really needs to be subpackaged. 14:27:08 <rdieter> oh, ouch. ok, -devel is needed for sure. Is there a good space savings to be had for splitting then too? 14:27:30 <rdieter> I guess the library split would help multilib-wise too 14:27:51 <Kevin_Kofler> Well, do you want kdenetwork to drag in all of linphone? 14:28:01 <Kevin_Kofler> It's a complete app. 14:28:21 <rdieter> depends. if it's only 4k, not a big deal. :) 14:28:50 <rdieter> anyway, looks worthwhile, who wants to be tasked to work on this? 14:28:58 <rdieter> Kevin_Kofler: do you have time, or rather someone else look at it? 14:29:45 <Kevin_Kofler> I think first of all we need to talk to the linphone maintainer. 14:30:10 <rdieter> sure, part of the "task" would be communicating our needs 14:30:30 <rdieter> (though that was done awhile back already in the aforementioned bug) 14:31:03 * rdieter can do it, but has to work on kdm/plymouth first (unless someone wants to help with that too). :) 14:31:45 <jreznik> rdieter: what's the current state of kdm/plymouth integration? 14:31:56 <rdieter> jreznik: there is none (on f13+) 14:32:12 <jreznik> Kevin_Kofler is right - we should ask maintainer first 14:32:22 <jreznik> and offer help in case he refuses to do it 14:34:51 <rdieter> alright, we'll continue to consider linphone an open issue (volunteers still welcome) 14:35:29 <rdieter> #help volunteer to lead effort to split libmediastreamer from linphone (see also bug #490046) 14:35:36 <rdieter> #topic phonon-vlc 14:36:03 <rdieter> with phonon-vlc backend on the horizon, get started on getting libvlc 1.1 into Rawhide (split into Fedora / RPM Fusion) 14:37:09 <rdieter> heliocastro mentioned having some initial work toward getting phonon-vlc packaged, but we'll still need vlc split into free/nonfree parts 14:37:59 <Kevin_Kofler> And the lib should also be a subpackage, we don't want Phonon to drag in VLC the app. 14:38:06 <Kevin_Kofler> (if that's not already the case9 14:38:07 <Kevin_Kofler> ) 14:38:11 <rdieter> this is another item I can add to my todo list, but it'll be down my own list by at least 2-3 items 14:38:31 <than> is the vlc tarball ok because of patent issue? 14:38:43 <rdieter> than: it'll probably require cleaning 14:38:52 <Kevin_Kofler> than: No, it needs to be cleaned just like xine-lib. 14:38:52 <rdieter> similar to what we currently do for xine-lib 14:39:03 <than> it's needed to be clear before working on vlv package 14:39:55 * rdieter answers phone, will be afk a few minutes 14:41:18 <than> we need someone who reviews the vlc 14:41:20 <Kevin_Kofler> Of course VLC can only go into Fedora if the tarball is stripped of all patent-encumbered stuff. 14:41:47 <jreznik> how difficult would be to split? 14:42:02 <jreznik> is it prepared for split or more effort needed? 14:42:35 <than> jreznik: i'm afraid there're more works than just splitted 14:43:10 <Kevin_Kofler> I was told current VLC is modular and it should just be a matter of splitting out the offending plugins. 14:43:10 <than> it needs to be done from upstream 14:43:18 <Kevin_Kofler> Just like we handle xine-lib. 14:43:32 <Kevin_Kofler> I've also looked at it and this seems to indeed the case. 14:44:24 <than> Kevin_Kofler: it's easy if it's the case 14:45:06 <Kevin_Kofler> We still need to check what's patent-encumbered and what's not. That can take quite some time. 14:45:50 <than> Kevin_Kofler: yes, the closed review is really required here 14:46:24 <than> we need someone who knows more about vlc 14:46:52 <than> and we need a new maintainer for vlc! 14:46:53 <rdieter> ideally, else we''ll end up learning on the job 14:46:58 <jreznik> and about patented bits 14:47:24 <Kevin_Kofler> Well, I can sign up as maintainer or comaintainer, it can't be worse than xine-lib. 14:47:52 <Kevin_Kofler> But the initial split is going to require some work. 14:48:02 <rdieter> I don't think there's any rush here, it's not going to be much ready for f13 (or shipable by default anyway) 14:48:02 <Kevin_Kofler> I'm not sure if I'll have the time to do it soon. 14:48:17 <Kevin_Kofler> But we should get it ready for F14. 14:48:36 <than> yes, add it on todo for F14 14:48:38 <rdieter> #help get vlc into fedora (and split into free/nonfree parts), usable by phonon-vlc 14:48:51 <Kevin_Kofler> Also because providing it as an update will get messy, due to requiring an upgrade and a split of VLC. 14:49:16 <rdieter> no pain, no gain 14:49:30 <Kevin_Kofler> So it should be in F14 as shipped. 14:50:47 <rdieter> alrighty, that's it for the agenda today 14:50:51 <rdieter> #topic open discussion 14:50:56 <rdieter> anything else for today? 14:51:39 <jreznik> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FUDCon:Zurich_2010 14:51:49 <jreznik> anyone going? 14:53:26 <rdieter> not I (unless my wish for a private jet or better, transporter, materializes real soon) 14:53:44 <jreznik> rdieter: yep, for eu people :) 14:53:59 <jreznik> but some fedora transport beams... 14:54:08 <rdieter> now you're talkin 14:54:12 <Kevin_Kofler> Me, probably not, though maybe… 14:54:23 <thomasj_> jreznik, i might go to Zurich. Depends if i get the Car soon enough. 14:54:48 <Kevin_Kofler> The train journey is long and expensive, plane might be an option, but probably also expensive. 14:54:58 <jreznik> Kevin_Kofler: we can probably collect you in Vienna 14:55:07 <jreznik> it's worst way but 14:55:17 <Kevin_Kofler> That'd be a detour for you, I guess. 14:56:27 <jreznik> Kevin_Kofler: it's a little bit slower 14:56:37 <rdieter> ok, we're about out of time, can continue FUDCon:Zurich talk in #fedora-kde 14:56:41 <rdieter> thanks everybody 14:56:43 <rdieter> #endmeeting