14:02:28 #startmeeting KDE SIG Meeting -- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE/Meetings/2010-01-26 14:02:28 Meeting started Tue Jan 26 14:02:28 2010 UTC. The chair is rdieter. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:02:28 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 14:02:33 #meetingname kde-sig 14:02:33 The meeting name has been set to 'kde-sig' 14:02:48 #chair Kevin_Kofler jreznik than 14:02:48 Current chairs: Kevin_Kofler jreznik rdieter than 14:02:54 #topic roll call 14:02:58 who's present today 14:03:00 here 14:03:00 ? 14:03:19 * jreznik is here 14:03:27 * ltinkl is here 14:03:37 Present. 14:04:51 #topic kde-4.3.5, kde-4.3.95 status updates 14:04:57 easy one first 14:05:38 re: 4.3.95 , as of this morning, f11 builds are done @ kde-redhat/unstable too, so we're all good for testing there 14:06:09 4.3.5 builds are going in koji now, should be all done in another hour or 2 or so 14:06:11 Re 4.3.5, you synced an old kdegames to F-11, I already handled the rebasing of the trademarks patch! 14:06:24 damn, oops 14:06:32 * SMParrish_away late but here 14:06:46 sorry about that, can fix/revert after meeting 14:07:00 #info 4.3.95 f11 builds are done @ kde-redhat/unstable 14:07:11 We should also fix the kde-l10n-sl mess, if that's not Slovenian it shouldn't be called -Slovenian. ;-) 14:07:16 there's also a small complication around 4.3.5 and webkitkde 14:07:44 IMHO webkitkde shouldn't be updated again before 4.4. 14:07:47 Kevin_Kofler: lol what's inside then? :) 14:08:08 Kevin_Kofler: I'd prefer that too, but the alternative is dropping webkit support 14:08:20 nucleo? 14:08:29 I think it doesn't make sense to update webkitkde now. 14:08:37 We'll update it together with KDE 4.4. 14:09:09 ltinkl: Reportedly sl = Sierra Leone, si (new in 4.4) = Slovenian. But I haven't verified this. 14:09:38 Kevin_Kofler: si is Slovenian, ye 14:10:04 anyway, it's strange to mark the translation packages by the country name (!) 14:10:18 #topic kde-l10n-sl Slovenian vs Sierra Leone 14:10:42 ltinkl: IMHO we should stop doing that entirely. 14:10:50 But then we need a transition plan. 14:11:02 related topic is the kde-l10n template I worked on. 14:11:05 We should use the upstream names, both for kde-l10n and for the old kde-i18n. 14:11:26 It doesn't make sense to do what we do now, and it's even more embarassing when we do it wrong. 14:11:46 at least for kde-l10n, I'd second Kevin_Kofler's suggestion, with 4.4 , switch to kde-l10n- (upstream) naming 14:11:56 rdieter: +1 14:12:00 less confusion 14:12:21 downside is when/if we push updates for < f13, comps will need changing 14:12:35 but that's manageable 14:12:50 well, f13 comps will need changing too, of course. :) 14:12:58 We could change kde-i18n for F13 only (for now). 14:13:10 It doesn't make sense to push an update just for that. 14:13:23 I agree with that too. 14:13:55 what do the others think? 14:14:02 jreznik, than ? 14:14:32 sounds good 14:14:32 Kevin_Kofler: +1 14:15:25 #agreed with kde-4.4, work to rename translations to kde-l10n- 14:15:51 But we should also s/Slovenian/SierraLeone/ for 4.3.5. 14:15:59 And fix comps. 14:16:08 and kde-i18n- rename for f13+ , all agreed there too 14:16:10 ? 14:16:17 It's really a bad screwup. :-/ 14:16:42 rdieter: I think so. 14:17:04 I didn't see any complaints. 14:17:06 just checking before marking it agreed for the log 14:17:47 Kevin_Kofler: Ok. No more updates untill 4.4 release. 14:18:00 #agreed for f13+, also rename translations to kde-i18n- 14:18:17 nucleo: FYI, this is just about releases. In Rawhide we want to track the 4.4 stuff of course. 14:18:46 For the releases we'll want to group the webkitpart update together with the KDE 4.4 one. 14:19:28 But grouping one with 4.3.5 seems to cause more problems than it solves, so just leave it as is for now. 14:19:49 even if "leaving as-is" means disabling webkitpart support ? 14:19:55 even more confusion: .si is Slovenia (as country code), si is the Sinhala language code 14:20:00 So, in kdebase 4.3.5 webkitpart should be droped temporarily 14:20:10 ltinkl: Oh, is it? 14:20:18 So what's what language now? 14:20:18 the Slovenian (as the language) indeed uses sl 14:20:26 so upstream got it wrong I guess 14:20:30 lol 14:20:46 Upstream is using wrong language codes? Are you sure? 14:21:01 http://websvn.kde.org/trunk/l10n-kde4/sl/messages/entry.desktop?revision=1068128&view=markup 14:21:03 see 14:21:20 SierraLeone isnt a language; or at least doesnt sound like one 14:21:22 ltinkl: you mind doing followup with upstream, and get to the bottom of things, before we act? 14:21:25 "sl" is Slovenian, ".si" is Slovenia 14:21:32 rdieter, nucleo: Huh? 14:21:33 mathstuf: ye, that too 14:21:42 Krio is its language 14:21:46 I thought the problem was that updating webkitpart breaks things?! 14:21:50 Kevin_Kofler: kdebase-4.3.5 + webkitpart-0.0.2 = build fail 14:22:07 so options are update webkitpart to match, or drop support 14:22:07 Oh, then we do want to update, I guess! 14:22:19 well, I'll check with upstream (Dirk & co.) before we start fixing our stuff :) 14:22:35 ltinkl: please check with dirk müller 14:22:39 Well yes, if 4.3.5 expects an updated webkitpart now, then we do need to update it! 14:22:41 #task ltinkl to check with kde upstream about locale naming issues (si vs sl) 14:23:02 I thought it was the opposite (i.e. it didn't work with the updated one, just with the old one). 14:23:06 oops 14:23:13 #action ltinkl to check with kde upstream about locale naming issues (si vs sl) 14:23:26 Kevin_Kofler: but then many patches needed backport in konq-plugins to build it with new webkitpart 14:23:28 Kevin_Kofler: sorry for the confusion 14:23:43 Oh, so konq-plugins is the trouble? 14:23:46 #topic webkitpart, update or not for 4.3.5 14:24:03 Well, as the update seems to be required, let's do it. 14:24:16 Kevin_Kofler: it'll be required sooner or later 14:24:17 it looks like 14:24:18 Alternatively, we could revert the patches from 4.3.5 which expect the new version. 14:24:32 Kevin_Kofler: yes, the better is leave old webkitkde and konq-plugins and drop webkitpart in kdebase 14:24:32 But I think we should just fix the konq-plugins issue. 14:24:42 We should do it for Rawhide anyway. 14:24:43 might as well be sooner, but I'm worried that webkitpart will change/rename things again 14:25:27 ltinkl: I checked, upstream uses the correct language codes and we didn't screw up, -sl really is -Slovenian. 14:25:32 http://websvn.kde.org/trunk/l10n-kde4/sl/messages/entry.desktop?revision=1068128&view=markup - sl = Slovenian 14:25:41 http://websvn.kde.org/trunk/l10n-kde4/si/messages/entry.desktop?revision=1078050&view=markup - si = Sinhala 14:25:48 woo! :) 14:25:50 It's whoever claimed that sl = Sierra Leone who screwed up. 14:25:56 there is in kdevase only kttsplugin uses webkitpart 14:26:02 *kdebase 14:26:33 that's mostly harmless then, either (re kdebase/webkitpart). 14:26:49 I'll keep going, as long as nothing else breaks, we can just leave that out of kdebase-4.3.5 14:26:51 Well, I can revert the upstream patch expecting the new version. 14:26:58 It's probably fairly easy. 14:27:38 There's also KGet in kdenetwork, but they're disabling webkitpart support there for 4.4 as "incomplete", so might as well do so in 4.3.5 as well. 14:28:23 nucleo: Uh, doesn't Konqueror itself also need to know about the webkitpart? 14:28:42 Kevin_Kofler: no 14:28:46 so, plan a, as long as nothing else breaks, stick with existing webkitkde-0.0.2 14:28:55 you mean revert this http://websvn.kde.org/?view=revision&revision=1071180 ? 14:29:00 otherwise, come up with some sort of plan b. :) 14:29:22 nucleo: Yeah, that's the one, thanks. 14:29:29 Trivial to revert. 14:29:51 Just svn diff -r 1071180:1071179 … 14:30:43 Do you want me to handle this? 14:30:47 Kevin_Kofler: you want to patch kdebase then? (I'll be pretty swamped finishing the remaining 4.3.5 builds and other stuff probably) 14:30:51 yeah 14:30:55 please. :) 14:31:10 OK, doing. 14:31:26 #action Kevin_Kofler to patch/revert kdebase to support older/existing webkitpart 14:31:47 #topic kde-l10n template 14:32:14 I've got a rough first draft, of split/templated kde-l10n 14:32:32 http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/kde-l10n.spec 14:32:53 I used de/German as the example here, but it should mostly just-work for pretty much any locale 14:33:21 cleanup to do would be to make excluding stuff simpler 14:33:50 ideally, do something similar for "include" type stuff as well (ie, make the template easier to add/remove stuff) 14:34:17 but you should get the idea, this version already uses the agreed-upon kde-l10n- style 14:34:57 The problem is that all the logic in %build to blacklist stuff has to be copied to every single specfile. 14:34:58 another TODO is a script to generate the spec for all supported locales, but that should be fairly trivial 14:35:06 rdieter: I wonder how this renaming affects the PackageKit language plugin 14:35:15 Plus we need to issue n builds if we change anything in that logic. 14:35:21 n > 50, that's quite a lot. 14:35:31 true 14:35:57 I recently had to change kde-l10n to get rid of leftover kpilot translations so I could have kpilot ship them all (some of them got removed, some not). 14:36:05 I was able to change it in one place. 14:36:18 I was hoping to factor include/exclude/blacklist logic into some common/shared code (in kde-l10n somewhere?) 14:36:40 I''d consider getting that all correct and implemented a requirement before moving forward 14:36:46 With split SRPMs, I'd have had to change everything and issue at least a dozen builds, up to >50 if I didn't want to have to check which languages were actually affected (i.e. extra work). 14:37:26 or just do all the builds, which could also could benefit from scripting 14:37:31 Kevin is right here 14:38:03 let's consider *that* also a requirement/blocker, else maintainance would be a much larger burdon, indeed. 14:39:33 my first attempt at doing some of this involved trying to make find-lang.sh smarter to find all this extra stuff, but oi, staring at the sed regular expression hackery there hurt my brane. 14:39:44 If we just do all the builds at any change, why bother with separate SRPMs?! 14:40:06 Kevin_Kofler: at least we'd have the flexibility to do it either way, if we so chose. 14:41:03 any other feedback/requirements for the template? 14:41:37 rdieter: The thing is, that's worthless in practice and not worth the drawbacks. 14:41:57 Bodhi updates for KDE will become huge and Bodhi will take even longer to process them than it already does. 14:42:12 It might even time out entirely. 14:42:38 I'd venture it'll be about the same, the amount of content will be the same 14:42:49 yes, need to rebuild all for just a few changed is bad idea... 14:42:53 but I can ask lmacken for sure, if you want 14:43:32 The amount of content will be larger as there are more SRPMs, which are also moved. 14:43:54 And I think Bodhi works at Koji build level and so it has to move >50 tags rather than 1. 14:43:59 That takes >50 times longer, obviously. 14:44:07 except each smaller srpms = approximate the same as the one larger srpm 14:44:21 That's irrelevant. 14:44:33 The tag move operations are >50 times more. 14:44:44 the time is the moving around of the bits, not the # of srpms, but again, we can get facts instead of conjecture, if you want. :) 14:45:08 ~4 times as much if you count all of the KDE update. 14:45:17 ok, rdieter to find out facts ;-) 14:45:44 The time it needs between me clicking submit and Bodhi being done is used for tag moves. 14:45:53 The more tags to move, the longer it takes. 14:46:03 It already takes long enough to time out my browser at times. 14:46:24 we have to check what will more packages do with bodhi for splits too... so it's a good question at all 14:47:20 right, the # of pkgs getting tagged will be approx the same. 14:48:03 #task rdieter to followup with lmacken on pkg split impact on bodhi 14:48:28 anything else, or move on ? 14:49:20 #topic open discussion 14:49:42 SMParrish: you notice the kpk-0.5.4-2 build I did, seems to fix the (self-induced) crashers I was seeing 14:50:08 FYI, I issued kdebase builds with that patch reverted, we'll see if they build. 14:50:22 rdieter: No I hadn't but I'll give it a try 14:50:31 Well, they don't. :-( 14:50:31 much happier now, kpk actually works (the basic stuff, notifying of updates, actually installing them..) :) 14:51:32 #info kde-l10n-sl is really Slovenian, so there's nothing we need to fix there for 4.3.5. 14:51:36 I still have my reservations about kpk's apparent lack of upstream love/maintainance (ie, only 1 already-busy developer) 14:51:40 (I just wanted this to be logged.) 14:52:33 rdieter: There's no real alternative to KPK. 14:52:33 rdieter: I have concerns about that as well. Upstream is also not keeping up with PK changes and releases which is becoming a big issue 14:52:46 Oh BTW, the ABRT topic was not brought up?! 14:52:59 oops 14:53:03 Kevin_Kofler: yep but it's too late now :( 14:53:14 #topic drop ABRT from the KDE spin? 14:53:15 No, we have 7 minutes left. 14:53:15 I've invited ABRT developers to join us but as we were out of time 14:53:17 Kevin_Kofler: go ahead. 14:53:40 So I proposed that we drop ABRT from the KDE spin for multiple reasons: 14:53:58 * most of our stuff is KDE apps which use KCrash/DrKonqi anyway 14:54:12 * it reports crashes to downstream instead of upstream where they belong 14:55:03 for jmoskovc: * most of our stuff is KDE apps which use KCrash/DrKonqi anyway, * it reports crashes to downstream instead of upstream where they belong 14:55:03 * it's a GTK+-based service running in the background, I'd like to avoid GTK+ in memory all the time and with KNM we might be getting there 14:55:27 What about Internet menu in KDE 4.4? Should it be splited on submenus or it should be like in 4.3.x? 14:55:34 in Kickoff 14:55:40 just because abrt isn't ideal *now* in it's infancy, doesn't mean we should abandon it. I'd suggestion compiling a list of gripes/concerns, and give feedback to abrt developers. Now, if our feedback/concerns do not get addressed, *then* reconsider our options 14:55:56 Well, what needs to be improved: 14:56:02 nucleo: we use kde/upstream menu style choices there 14:56:09 Kevin_Kofler: jmoskovc is a lead developer 14:56:10 * reporting to upstream trackers – a lot of work as there are many upstreams! 14:56:22 * Qt/KDE frontend 14:57:11 * an option to easily ignore classes of crashes (e.g. I don't want to be told for the bazillionth time about some warn_on_slowpath in the kernel) 14:57:53 that ones not really required by us (kde-sig) but a user-desirable feature (by Kevin_Kofler). :) 14:58:36 It's true that those are what I'd personally want to see improved, opinions of the other folks here may differ. ;-) 14:58:58 But even with that improved, I'm still not convinced we have to ship it on the KDE spin at all. 14:59:12 As KDE already has its own solution (DrKonqi). 14:59:24 Kevin_Kofler, rdieter: abrt is very modular/pluggable - so I think everything is possible 14:59:37 Kevin_Kofler: kde's solution only works for kde apps, of course. 14:59:56 Oh, another thing I'd like to see changed: actually install -debuginfo packages instead of extracting them into the cache, it makes it easier to remove them later. 15:00:10 Kevin_Kofler: Dr Konqui has other problems - exactly opposite ones - we don't know about crashes - and these crashes could be our problem 15:00:26 and installing debug infos is not very well done right now 15:00:29 But that requirement and the "ignore classes of crashes" one aren't really related to KDE, they're nice-to-haves. 15:00:34 makes me wonder, when a kde app crashes, is it true or not that drkonqi gets in first (before abrt)? 15:00:46 it's not clear to me, I thought it was true. 15:00:54 AFAICT, DrKonqi catches it and ABRT doesn't see it. 15:00:59 ok 15:01:02 (unless you disable DrKonqi) 15:01:04 rdieter: dr. konqui has to be disabled 15:01:18 jreznik: Hopefully never. 15:01:25 At least not until ABRT can report to bugs.kde.org. 15:01:36 so what's the harm then ? we're only getting abrt reports for stuff not caught by drkonqi 15:01:37 there's sig* handler in kapplication 15:01:37 I don't want all those crash reports in the downstream bugzilla! 15:02:07 rdieter: It wastes precious live image space. 15:02:26 ok, I'm open to analyzing the space usage, and make a decision based on that. 15:02:30 Kevin_Kofler: you want to do that ? 15:02:35 Kevin_Kofler: it's not so big - few scripts 15:02:38 jmoskovc: ? 15:03:40 well, now we are out of time, let's continue in #fedora-kde 15:03:54 and perhaps discuss this furhter next week. 15:04:02 thanks everyone 15:04:10 #endmeeting