[Di Jul 31 2007] [18:03:18] rdieter: ping? [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:13:46] can one of you lead the meeting today? I'll be only about 1/2 here (brain/time wise)... busy/bad day @ work. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:14:25] I'm going to chair it for today. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:14:35] Topic Kevin_Kofler setzt das Kanal-Topic auf "KDE SIG Meeting - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE/Meetings/2007-07-31". [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:15:38] main topic seems to be the the plan for kde4. Are there news about the schedule? [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:15:44] Topic Kevin_Kofler setzt das Kanal-Topic auf "KDE SIG Meeting - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE/Meetings/2007-07-31 - New plan for KDE 4?". [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:16:04] Last I checked, they decided not to slip for now. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:16:53] good :) [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:16:55] I just rechecked, there seems to be no announcement about a slip. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:17:23] atm, things are looking brighter to ship a complete kde4 desktop for f8. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:17:39] But as than says there's still a fair amount of breakage. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:17:53] Some relatively simple things end up with a SIGSEGV. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:18:29] yeah, we can (re)evaluate after test2, and fall back to kde3 desktop if necessary. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:19:09] or, sounds like Than thinks that's mostly hopeless... ? [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:19:44] i mean [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:19:44] in F8, we will ship KDE3 as default desktop (package name should not be renamed) [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:19:44] and we ship kde4 as techpreview [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:19:47] and rename it to kdeXXX4 [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:20:14] there's lots of other small benefits to moving to kde4... proper support of fdo/xdg specs, mime, icons, etc... which is lacking in kde3. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:20:24] Right. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:20:34] I'd like to try moving to KDE 4. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:21:00] * rdieter shugs, I think we should give it a try for f8test2 at least, and see how things go. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:21:31] even if we revert to kde3 desktop, I don't think we need to be renaming any pkgs, as than suggests (on #fedora-kde recently) [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:21:38] I think some regressions will be pretty much unavoidable unfortunately. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:21:47] But there will also be benefits. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:22:27] hopefully, the long-term pros will outweigh the short-term cons. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:22:35] we'll just have to wait and see. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:22:38] That's what I hope too. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:22:42] it's too early to judge, imo. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:23:23] I also think we should wait for test2 and decide this then [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:23:54] The problem is that rel-eng will probably want a decision in time for the test2 freeze. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:24:02] Because that's supposed to be our feature freeze. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:24:17] I thought feature freeze came after t2? hmm.... [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:25:07] The feature freeze on test3 was only for F7 because there was that extra test4. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:25:43] ok, let's go check schedule... [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:26:22] oh. right. feature freeze is on August 28, and there's no test4 planned [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:27:00] well, depends on your definition of "feature" in feature freeze. We'll still be including KDE4 in f8, in some shape and form. :) [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:27:25] rdieter: we ship KDE4 as techpreview [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:27:31] in f8 [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:27:50] rdieter: but not as default desktop [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:27:58] than: so what's that mean exactly? [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:28:27] than: what do you propose? How much of kde3, kde4 gets included? how? [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:28:34] rdieter: that means we rename kde4 to kdelibs4, [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:28:44] kdebase4 .... [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:29:02] and KDE4HOME home will be .kde4 [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:29:03] than: We can't realistically ship KDE 3 and 4 versions of everything. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:29:04] than: and everything else too? kdeaccessibility, kdeadmins, ... kdeutils, etc? [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:29:36] than: imo, if we *do* revert, only do kdelibs/kdebase. most of the rest could be kde4 versions, no? [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:29:44] There will be tons of conflicts, unless you want to use the /opt/kde4 hack, which even I (who introduced it in the first place as a short-term hack) want to get rid of. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:30:04] Kevin_Kofler: +1 [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:30:15] We can only realistically parallel-install kdelibs and the runtime part of kdebase. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:30:25] Not kdebase apps or any other applications. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:30:34] Verlassen VileGent hat den Kanal verlassen ("Leaving"). [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:31:00] than: unless you think most/all of kde4 is *so* bad, we can't/shouldn't include much of any of it? [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:31:00] kde4 techpreview cannot be installed parallel with kde3 [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:31:33] than: so techpreview means what? different prefix? [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:32:03] rdieter: kde4 techpreview will replace kde3 [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:32:08] eww.. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:32:15] rdieter: it will be installed in /usr [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:32:15] Then we have to maintain 2 sets of packages. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:32:21] We're already swamped with one. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:32:53] Kevin_Kofler: the bright side is that it could offer an opportunity for continuing efforts to fix parallel-install issues. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:33:27] I just don't know *right now*, I'd rather we at least try it, even if it doesn't make test2. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:34:02] I think trying to get the libs (kdelibs + kdebase/runtime) parallel-installed and picking one version for everything else will be a much greater incentive to get parallel-installing working. :-) [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:34:04] maybe we can defer the decision, at least until we get a few more modules packaged for testing. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:34:39] Kevin_Kofler: +1, my thinking exactly. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:34:47] rdieter: i have tested KDE4 beta 1 [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:34:58] rdieter: it's so broken [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:35:55] than: ok, why not keep kde3 desktop, and include kde4 runtime, +selected good kde4 modules (say, like kdgames)? [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:35:57] i don't think we can get a kde4 stable in F8 [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:36:23] we could then even provide a kde4 devel environment in f8. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:36:32] even if it isn't a full kde4 desktop. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:36:38] +1 [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:36:55] That's also why I'd really like to find a solution for the -devel conflicts. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:37:32] It makes things easier for developers who have to maintain both a stable KDE 3 version and a development KDE 4 version of their apps. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:38:10] (I'm one of these, it's what motivated me to work on KDE 4 in the first place. ;-) Though now that it's starting to get actually usable, I'm also interested in KDE 4 itself.) [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:38:31] we can do that with KDE4 techpreview [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:38:38] than: by not including any kde4 runtime in f8, we preclude any possibility of including any new, bright, shiny kde4 apps as well. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:38:49] Indeed. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:39:05] And the techpreview is not a practical solution for developers having to maintain both a KDE 3 and a KDE 4 version. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:39:48] I really don't want to have to build a SRPM and run mock (which rebuilds the entire app from scratch, even up to building the chroot) each time I test a one-line change to my app. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:39:57] And I think most developers will think the same. :-) [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:40:39] -devel conflicts mean only one file to replace, no conflicts would be ideal. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:40:44] s/file/package/ [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:40:55] mock for building is one thing (ie devel conflicts), but not including a parallel-installable kde3/kde4 runtime will suck even more. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:41:50] +1 [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:42:22] The more stuff one needs to replace to switch from KDE 3 development to KDE 4 development, the worse. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:42:22] ok, then we should make parallel-installable kde3/kde4 runtime [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:42:56] but kde3 package name should not be renamed [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:43:22] we rename kde4 to kdexxxx4 [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:43:35] ok, I don't care much about names, as long as things "just work". kdelibs4/kdebase4(runtime) anyway. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:43:43] We rename the non-default stuff. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:44:04] it's fine with me [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:44:07] So if we default to the KDE 3 desktop, we have kdelibs/kdelibs4 and kdebase/kdebase4. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:44:16] I'd still argue the remaining kde modules could be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, to see of the kde4 version(s) can/should be included. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:44:31] But if we default to kdegames 4, then we have kdegames/kdegames3 there. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:44:38] kdegames, kdemultimedia are two primary examples. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:45:00] I'm not sure about kdemultimedia. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:45:07] hello? phonon? [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:45:15] Or is that not in kdemm? [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:45:19] How mature is Phonon by now? [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:45:28] all kde4 packages should be renamed [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:45:31] Many new multimedia apps will be using it. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:45:32] Shipping the non-dummy Phonon backend from kdemultimedia definitely makes sense. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:45:49] There's no arguing with that. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:46:32] than: imo, pick a "best of breed" version 3 or 4 of each module, and stick with that. but that's just me. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:47:07] I suppose the "4" versioned modules could be named kde*4, don't care. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:47:26] But shipping the Phonon versions of the multimedia apps is what I'm unsure about. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:47:51] I haven't tested them, so I don't know how well they work by now. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:48:01] Kevin_Kofler: that's up to pkg maintainers to use their best judgement, not our call to make. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:48:11] rdieter: yes, the kde4 packages should be named kde*4 [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:48:15] I mean the apps within kdemultimedia itself. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:48:19] oh [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:48:36] Kevin_Kofler: what do yuo mean? [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:48:55] kdemultimedia contains some apps like Noatun and JuK. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:49:38] imo, move to phonon, else we'd need to keep the whole arts/kdemm3/akode stack around (which I'd really like to omit or deprecate if possible) [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:49:40] Kevin_Kofler: do we really want to ship them? [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:50:04] Kevin_Kofler: Noatun and JuK in KDE3 still work [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:50:08] For the naming, I think the package providing most of the stuff should keep the unversioned name. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:50:54] It doesn't make sense to have a kdegames with only the unported games and a kdegames4 with most of the games. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:51:16] Rex, may I hop in a sec on something (not related to multimedia)? [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:51:33] CyberSpy: sure, quick. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:51:47] kde4-related, I hope? :) [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:52:20] I'm involved with kftpgrabber, and I would like to see it included with Fedora, and we're working on a version for KDE4 as well. I would like to be the Fedora package maintainer for it [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:52:34] CyberSpy: good news! [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:53:05] It's in KDE Extras, but yet it's not in our (Fedora) Extras and I have no idea why [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:53:16] Please follow the process in the wiki: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:53:38] Kevin_Kofler: do we want to ship kdegames4 ? [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:53:47] Kevin, thanks [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:54:17] CyberSpy: feel free to ask questions, and give us a pointer to the eventual pkg review, and we'll help move it along. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:54:34] Rex, sounds good. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:55:00] than: yes! kdegames4 is vastly superior. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:55:09] I did find quite a few bugs with the KDE version for Fedora, but that will be given to the devel team. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:55:21] (A lot of it invloved Anaconda) [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:55:25] A few games have not been ported, but I already made a kdegames3 package for those. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:55:43] CyberSpy: :) let us know, mailing lists, bugzilla, whatever. feedback is always welcome. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:56:38] One Bugzilla entry per bug is usually the best procedure. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:56:53] Hopefully there aren't so many to make it tedious. ;-) [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:57:23] rdieter: is it not redundant to ship kdegames and kdegames4 [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:57:57] than: We want kdegames with the KDE 4 games and kdegames3 with the KDE 3 games not yet ported to KDE 4. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:58:05] no, but including a 'kdegames' that include only 1 item seems a little silly. [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:58:30] There's more than 1 item in kdegames3, but still the idea is that. ;-) [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:58:54] Hi, can somebody help me with time in Fedora 7 please? [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:58:56] I can understand the logic of maintaining consistency and naming all kde4 modules *4, but kdegames seems to be an example worthy of an exception [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:59:18] milan_: #fedora is probably a better place to ask. :) [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:59:42] rdieter: +1 [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:59:45] I would concur that kdegames should just be kdegames, and it shouldn't include kde3 games, only kde4, while it may seem dumb or redundant to have both, it may confuse people if they see kdegames and kdegames3 pacakges [Di Jul 31 2007] [18:59:49] ok [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:00:16] CyberSpy: There definitely will be kdegames3. [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:00:16] CyberSpy: well, we *will* have 2 kdegames pkgs, whether they're named kdegames3/kdegames or kdegames/kdegames4 is the ? at hand. [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:00:40] time is running out: One short question: What do you think about an KDE4-only based LiveCD for testing issues based on the packages from kde-redhat? [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:00:49] svahl: awesome! [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:01:01] no we should consistency name kde*4, kdegames (KDE4) should named kdegames4 [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:01:08] I disagree. [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:01:10] svahl: that could serve well as than's idea of a good "tech preview" [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:01:31] It's not consistent if installing kdegames gets you only the couple of games which hasn't been ported yet. [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:01:31] I've tried to make on this day. It's mostly working - except kdm [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:01:39] yum install kdegames should give users what they expect. [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:02:06] rdieter: You made a good point with the Phonon backends in kdemultimedia. If the plan is to default to KDE 3, we'll need a kdemultimedia4 package containing those. [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:02:10] svahl: yeah, kde4's kdm is still pretty busted, from my one 30-minute attempt at using it. Horrible hack: use gdm. :) [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:02:26] Also think so :) [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:02:39] Kevin_Kofler: yup [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:02:53] At least one of them. [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:03:06] I would agree with that as well, kdegames should be for kde4 if that's the kde version. Anything depricated should have the trailing nomenclature (maybe I'll just stay out of this discussion and just watch for a bit) [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:03:07] Phonon-xine should be it, that's the one which works best according to upstream. [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:03:17] I was hoping to get rid of all/most of kdemultimedia(3), but than seems to be opposed that, yes? [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:03:32] Kevin_Kofler: we should keep the name consistency [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:04:13] I think giving users what they expect when they yum install kdegames is more important than consistency. [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:04:13] out of time... (tho I think many FPC members won't be here today). [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:04:30] * spot waves his broom around [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:04:34] shoo! shoo! [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:04:34] hey [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:04:36] can we take further discussions to kde-redhat-devel ml? [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:04:42] damn did i miss the meeting? [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:04:52] XulChris: UTC bite ya again? :) [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:05:03] no just chores [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:05:18] And the consistency in our (rdieter's and my) proposal is that the default is always the unversioned one. [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:05:23] all i wanted to ask about was all the onlyshowin stuff [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:05:40] i guess i can bring it up next week [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:05:40] kinda packaging related...:) question? [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:05:46] I think many of the OnlyShowIn crap should go away. [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:05:54] Kevin_Kofler: +1 [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:06:03] But that needs to be coordinated with the (GNOME) Desktop Team. [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:06:11] ya i need to make a list of packages which i think are questionalbe, ill have more next week [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:06:19] Because ironically what we do will affect them and the opposite. [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:06:26] So we need to work together. [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:06:50] Or FPC make a standard policy around that. :) [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:07:19] i think a gmenu-kde package (opposite of kmenu-gnome) would work [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:07:30] spot: can we discuss that (OnlyShowIn in .desktop files) today, if we have time? [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:07:41] We've seen how well that works... :-( (*cough* GenericName *cough* Name *cough* *cough*) [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:07:44] sure. [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:08:06] Is there any hope that we'll be able to vote on anything today? [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:08:25] well, who [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:08:28] dunno if we have a quorum. [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:08:28] who is here? [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:08:31] I'm here [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:08:34] here [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:09:00] here [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:09:17] thats 5 (with tibbs) [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:09:21] * lutter is here [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:09:24] 6. [Di Jul 31 2007] [19:09:32] Topic Kevin_Kofler setzt das Kanal-Topic auf "Fedora Packaging Committee Meeting".