15:03:39 #startmeeting KDE SIG Meeting 15:03:39 Meeting started Tue Oct 8 15:03:39 2013 UTC. The chair is Kevin_Kofler. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:03:39 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 15:03:45 #meetingname kde-sig 15:03:45 The meeting name has been set to 'kde-sig' 15:03:53 #topic Role call 15:04:00 * Kevin_Kofler is present, obviously. :-) 15:04:02 Who else? 15:04:07 me 15:04:13 * mbriza 's present, too 15:04:23 here 15:04:35 present 15:08:21 #chair jgrulich mbriza rdieter than 15:08:21 Current chairs: Kevin_Kofler jgrulich mbriza rdieter than 15:08:33 #info Kevin_Kofler, jgrulich, mbriza, rdieter, than present. 15:08:36 #topic Agenda 15:08:50 So, the wiki page is nonexistent, so what do we have to discuss? 15:10:02 Kevin_Kofler: perhaps, kde-4.11.2 status 15:10:11 OK 15:10:16 Anything else? 15:11:05 I guess a status update on Qt 5 packaging (and maybe KF5 if there's anything to discuss for that already) would be nice too. 15:11:07 and qt5 status 15:11:12 Yeah. 15:11:37 considering a kde test day? (I suck, I think I was supposed to start discussion onlist about that from last week, and didn't) 15:12:18 OK, we'll come to that after the status updates. 15:12:26 #topic KDE 4.11.2 status 15:12:41 rdieter: So you were about to push this to stable? Is it queued now? 15:12:47 queue'd 15:12:55 I'm not aware of any reasons not to push it. 15:13:30 has someone already tested 4.11.2? 15:13:49 i have it running on two machines 15:13:49 * rdieter has a bunch, the f19 bodhi updates got a fair amount of positive karma 15:13:52 i will update to 4.11.2 and test today 15:13:58 #info KDE 4.11.2 queued for F19 stable updates / F20 stable "Branched". 15:14:04 rdieter: great 15:15:03 Nice to know it's gotten some testing. 15:15:14 I guess we can move on. 15:15:25 #topic Qt 5 status 15:15:36 What are the news there? 15:15:46 And has any work been done on packaging KF5? 15:16:34 I know Lubomir Rintel has been doing some packaging of Hawaii which included snapshots of parts of KF5, but I think that is not how we want the packages to eventually look like. 15:17:07 IMHO, the libraries should have some kf5- or kde-frameworks5- name prefix like the qt5- one. 15:17:32 +1 to standard prefix 15:18:44 anyway, as far as Qt5 status goes... 5.1.1 is all headed for f18/f19 stable updates 15:19:01 Great. 15:19:06 rdieter: great 15:19:25 #info Qt 5.1.1 headed for F18/F19 stable updates. 15:19:35 I see you've been doing 5.2.0 alpha builds for Rawhide, too. 15:19:38 and 5.2.0-alpha is in rawhide, yes 15:20:04 if time permits, I would like to do some kde-unstable 5.2.0-alpha builds too 15:20:19 What's the plan with that? Rawhide/unstable only until 5.2.0 final? 15:20:37 yes 15:20:42 Or are you going to push an alpha or beta to updates for KF5 developers? 15:20:52 (or to get KF5 in, even) 15:21:08 good question, maybe we could do it prior to a stable release if there is demand 15:21:17 My guess is that when 5.2.0 goes stable, KF5 will be requiring 5.3.0 pre-alpha. :-/ 15:21:46 Qt5 on f18/f19 is in tech-preview status already 15:22:29 anyone else with an opinion ? 15:23:38 I'd personally put it only into kde-unstable for now, that should be enough for developers, and consider pushing it to updates when/if we have KF5 ready too. 15:23:55 ok, that's probably safest 15:24:03 Ship prerelease versions only if we have something in Fedora actually wanting to use them. 15:24:55 #info Qt 5.2.0 alpha now in Rawhide. 15:25:08 #action rdieter wants to do kde-unstable builds of Qt 5.2.0 alpha if time permits. 15:25:35 I think that's all for this topic. 15:25:42 #topic KDE Test Day 15:25:43 esp if there's demand for it, accompanied by appropriate bribes of course (did I just say that out loud?) 15:25:51 :-) 15:27:18 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Fedora_20_Test_Days slots used so far 15:28:04 looks like most folks like to do them on thursdays 15:28:54 anyone able/interested in leading a test-day effort? this involves reserving the day, advertising it, and ideally, being around for some/most of the day day to help herd the cats 15:29:06 Yes, Thursday is Test Day, maybe because it sounds similar? ;-) 15:30:33 well, we can probably tentatively help narrow which day(s) to use 15:31:25 10-15 is open, then the next is 10-31, 11-05, etc... 15:31:56 hrm 10-31 falls on holloween , but probably not a big deal, how about that day? 15:32:06 10-15 is a little short-notice imo 15:32:19 I would prefer 31.10, because we have to improve ModemManager 1.0 support in plasma-nm 15:32:25 That will be a scary test day. ^^ 15:32:29 indeed 15:32:33 depends on you, we don't really celebrate halloween 15:32:51 i'd prefer the thursday though 15:33:05 Just FYI, Nov 1 is a public holiday in Austria. 15:33:21 11-07 then? that's the next thursday slot 15:33:29 It's a Friday, so you can expect people to already leave for a long weekend on Thursday late afternoon. 15:33:59 (which would negatively impact the returns from a 10-31 test day) 15:34:08 11-07 looks good 15:34:12 11-07 should be better, yes. 15:35:09 seems fine to me 15:38:35 So, Nov 7 fine with everybody? 15:38:49 looks like a tentative plan 15:39:00 yep 15:39:09 #agreed KDE Test Day tentatively scheduled for 2013-11-07. 15:39:27 #topic Open discussion 15:39:34 So, we're through the agenda, anything else? 15:40:03 * rdieter had something, but forgets now... must not have been that important. :) 15:40:19 ah, mbriza , any progress on userlist-less sddm theme? 15:40:44 the theme! well, there is no progress yet but i'll put the source somewhere finally 15:40:46 in particular, best to have that in place prior to test-day 15:40:58 ok 15:41:14 Yeah, we really need that in ASAP. 15:41:15 jreznik isn't here, i'll ask him how he meant it with the review or what he said earlier about it... 15:41:18 mbriza: we have svn/git repos on fedorahosted.org, do you hav access to those? 15:41:42 but to make Kevin_Kofler happy, i started working on the xdmcp server again: https://github.com/MartinBriza/sddm/commit/2756c36d88 15:41:46 if not, we can add you easy enough 15:41:54 rdieter: i have access to fedora-kde-artwork 15:42:04 ok, plop it in there 15:42:26 alright 15:42:43 and public safety notice, don't try running sddm directly as your normal user. :) 15:44:50 everything you typed passed through to the first VT from the second one? 15:45:25 something like that 15:45:38 weird... 15:45:47 mbriza: per the hilarity from earlier today in #fedora-kde 15:46:14 yeah, i couldn't understand what you said and then i noticed the usernames and passwords :) 15:46:59 Oh, and if you want to make me really happy, make an SDDM version of the Solar theme! 15:48:10 now you're just talking crazy. 15:48:30 you'd like that better than xdmcp? because it seems about a zillion times easier considering i still didn't get it to work :) 15:50:27 I think that XDMCP will be useful to more people in the end. 15:50:45 But I don't personally need it, if that's what you're asking. 15:50:56 btw, Beta TC2 is out... i tested the 20131004 build and it worked in contrary to TC1 so I hope TC2 will be the same 15:51:20 ah, i thought you were using it when you were standing so strong for its implementation 15:51:32 I'm just not happy about defaulting to a display manager which does not support all the things people expect from a display manager. 15:53:09 * Kevin_Kofler wonders how many other KDM features we were taking for granted (if any) are still missing from SDDM. 15:53:42 (Features we don't even think about putting in a requirements list because we're so used to them we find them obvious.) 15:53:52 I hope there aren't any of those, of course. 15:54:16 Kevin_Kofler: kdm is still available, it's not like the features are gone 15:54:46 One thing I can think of is configuration. Is there a configuration UI for SDDM yet? 15:54:58 Or are you stuck with the config file? :-( 15:54:59 the completely basic ones are already there... anyone advanced enough to use xdmcp can switch to kdm anyway 15:55:19 it is, not packaged yet though 15:56:03 That's the kind of a feature that should really be a requirement for anything you want to ship to end users, yet when you see stuff like polkit-1… 15:56:19 i don't quite understand why it's not a part of the main package 15:56:44 (Only configurable through config files in Fedora, a KDE configuration UI is in a partially-to-non-working state upstream, and there's no official configuration UI for it at all.) 15:56:46 what's with polkit? 15:56:55 oh 15:57:08 You have to write XML or JavaScript files to configure it even. 15:57:17 Not even plain config files like the SDDM one. 15:58:40 well i talked about the config ui with drf and we settled on leaving it as it is.. 15:59:37 but you're right the config files are a mess 16:00:45 I think the polkit-1 editor really needs to be finished/fixed upstream where needed and packaged in Fedora. 16:01:16 It'd be useful even to non-KDE users seeing how there's no other polkit-1 editor (unlike the old version). 16:01:59 There are plenty of polkit permissions I and many others would like to customize and it's a PITA to do so. 16:05:21 Anything else? It's time to conclude… 16:06:06 OK, thanks for coming! 16:06:09 #endmeeting