F7 KDE spin r2

[Kevin Kofler]

Chitlesh GOORAH <chitlesh <at> fedoraproject.org> writes:
> Ah ok :)
> So someone who was present can post their irc log for the meeting ?
> thanks

Feb 13 03:56:34 -->	rdieter (n=rdieter at sting.unl.edu) hat #fedora-devel 
betreten
Feb 13 03:57:11 <liquidat>	rdieter: Hej...
Feb 13 03:57:37 <--	mull hat sich getrennt (Read error: 110 (Connection 
timed out))
Feb 13 03:57:53 <rdieter>	liquidat: hi
Feb 13 03:58:20 <liquidat>	You can be quite lucky that I'm here - it is 
just because a review I wanted to write took so much longer (but was very 
exciting anyway).
Feb 13 03:58:35 <liquidat>	And I'm not sure how long I will stay here - 
it's 4 o'clock in the morning here...
Feb 13 03:58:42 <rdieter>	what review?
Feb 13 03:58:44 <liquidat>	But well, we'll see.
Feb 13 03:58:50 <liquidat>	I blogged about VirtualBox.
Feb 13 03:58:53 <Kevin_Kofler>	It's 4 AM too, so what? ;-)
Feb 13 03:58:56 <Kevin_Kofler>	+here
Feb 13 03:59:14 <liquidat>	Btw., *that* would be a cool addition for the 
KDE fedora spin (virtualbox' gui is qt).
Feb 13 03:59:32 <rdieter>	forgive my ignorance, what is it?
Feb 13 03:59:37 <liquidat>	Kevin_Kofler: Well, I guess it's the same time 
zone, even the same language (somewhat) ;)
Feb 13 04:00:03 <liquidat>	rdieter: A virtual machine. Just like Vmware, 
but the interface is stunning (perfect designed). It was released as GPL some 
days ago.
Feb 13 04:00:16 <rdieter>	like qemu too?
Feb 13 04:00:17 <liquidat>	
http://liquidat.wordpress.com/2007/02/13/review-innoteks-virtualbox/
Feb 13 04:01:09 <liquidat>	rdieter: Well, "like Qemu" if you mean the GPL 
part - the GUI is light years ahead, the speed is at the same level as Vmware, 
and you can even use it for servers because it works on command line as well.
Feb 13 04:01:18 <liquidat>	It is really stunning, believe me.
Feb 13 04:01:29 <rdieter>	looks impressive.
Feb 13 04:01:37 <liquidat>	Astonishing I meant. But, well stunning maybe 
also ;)
Feb 13 04:01:48 <rdieter>	afk ~2 min.
Feb 13 04:02:37 <liquidat>	Impressive is the right word...
Feb 13 04:03:29 <liquidat>	I copied a small performance test a news 
magazine here made, it gives a pretty good impression of the VirtualBox 
performance.
Feb 13 04:06:30 <liquidat>	Hm... so, who is here for the KDE talk?
Feb 13 04:06:40 <rdieter>	back.
Feb 13 04:06:52 <liquidat>	wb
Feb 13 04:07:31 <liquidat>	So - how do we start?
Feb 13 04:08:07 <rdieter>	ok, topic #1, encourage reviews of kde-related 
pkgs.
Feb 13 04:08:42 <rdieter>	I listed most of the (core) ones on the wiki: 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureFedoraKDE
Feb 13 04:09:06 <rdieter>	this is vital, movement needs to happen asap.
Feb 13 04:09:27 <rdieter>	no modification, or comaintainership can happen 
until these first pass review.
Feb 13 04:09:30 <liquidat>	What do we need to do? Just making usual 
package reviews with these?
Feb 13 04:09:44 <rdieter>	usual review, pretty much.
Feb 13 04:10:10 <liquidat>	Ah, ok.
Feb 13 04:10:34 <rdieter>	procedure is slightly different with merge 
reviews: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/WarrenTogami/ReviewWithFlags
Feb 13 04:11:23 <rdieter>	questions/comments?
Feb 13 04:12:02 <liquidat>	I could take a smaller one - the problem is 
that I have only my laptop as a machine to make mock build tests.
Feb 13 04:12:25 <liquidat>	kdenetwork takes more than 40 minutes here...
Feb 13 04:12:32 <rdieter>	with merge reviews, you can pretty much assume 
they already build.
Feb 13 04:12:40 <rdieter>	(:
Feb 13 04:12:49 <liquidat>	Well, not kdenetwork, that's the reason why I 
say.
Feb 13 04:13:17 <rdieter>	really?  interesting, well *most* should build 
as-is anyway. (:
Feb 13 04:13:26 <rdieter>	at least the kde-3.5.6 pkgs should.
Feb 13 04:13:37 -->	craigt (n=craigt at ool-43512319.dyn.optonline.net) hat 
#fedora-devel betreten
Feb 13 04:13:40 <rdieter>	kde < 3.5.5 had issues with rawhide's 
autoconf/automake stack.
Feb 13 04:13:46 <liquidat>	http://bugzilla.redhat.com/195486 there it says 
it doesn't.
Feb 13 04:14:29 <rdieter>	?? it worksforme.
Feb 13 04:14:33 <liquidat>	Anyway, can you add a flag on the webpage to 
each bug report if there is a reviewer already or not?
Feb 13 04:14:42 <rdieter>	I'll have to update that for kdenetwork-3.5.6
Feb 13 04:15:12 *	rdieter shrugs.
Feb 13 04:15:30 <liquidat>	Like, kdenetwork has a reviwer, but kdebindings 
does not?
Feb 13 04:15:56 <rdieter>	kdenetwork hasn't a reviewer (it's assigned 
still to nobody)
Feb 13 04:16:18 <rdieter>	kdebindings likely doesn't either.
Feb 13 04:18:12 <liquidat>	Strange, at the bug report of kdenetwork 
Michael J Knox said "I will review this one": 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195486#c2
Feb 13 04:18:12 <rdieter>	and in comment #9, said "I'll have to step 
out..."
Feb 13 04:18:12 <rdieter>	"and be unable to complete this review"
Feb 13 04:19:18 <rdieter>	anyway, there's a mix of merge reviews (from 
Core), and Review Requests of mine.
Feb 13 04:19:24 <liquidat>	Sorry, didn't see that :(
Feb 13 04:19:49 <rdieter>	the latter ones follow the "usual" Extras' 
procedure, the former the new ReviewWithFlags method.
Feb 13 04:20:11 <rdieter>	anything else?  otherwise, I'll try to move on.
Feb 13 04:20:17 <liquidat>	No, please move on.
Feb 13 04:21:04 <rdieter>	topic #2: package splitting.
Feb 13 04:21:50 <rdieter>	Rationale here is to include in the main pkgs 
only those bits we want installed by default,
Feb 13 04:21:57 <rdieter>	the rest split into subpkgs or into an -extras 
pkg, or simply omitted altogether (rarely).
Feb 13 04:22:42 <rdieter>	The best bits, trying to avoid overlaps in 
functionality.
Feb 13 04:23:01 <rdieter>	Again, I refer to 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureFedoraKDE
Feb 13 04:23:30 <rdieter>	Does the list of items to split-out make sense?
Feb 13 04:23:45 <liquidat>	Almost: kdenetwork lists kpdf?!
Feb 13 04:23:54 <rdieter>	(that list was mostly from a brainstorming 
session I had at FUDCon with Aaron Seigo of kde)
Feb 13 04:24:09 <rdieter>	kpdf != kpf
Feb 13 04:24:23 <liquidat>	Oh, my fault, sorry.
Feb 13 04:24:27 <rdieter>	n p
Feb 13 04:25:28 <rdieter>	stuff in () is what replaces the lost 
functionality (if that wasn't obvious).
Feb 13 04:25:40 <Kevin_Kofler>	What's the rationale for splitting off ktalkd? 
Doesn't that mean that if someone old school enough tries to send you a "talk" 
message, it gets just lost or printed on some console you'll never notice?
Feb 13 04:26:05 <rdieter>	ktalkd != old talk protocol.  It's something 
even older and different, afaik.
Feb 13 04:26:35 <rdieter>	(or am I rememberring it wrong?)
Feb 13 04:26:46 <liquidat>	
http://docs.kde.org/stable/en/kdenetwork/ktalkd/introduction.html
Feb 13 04:27:06 <Kevin_Kofler>	That at least claims it takes messages 
from "talk", as well as "ntalk" and "otalk".
Feb 13 04:27:11 <liquidat>	There are security concerns about running that 
app on multi-user-machines.
Feb 13 04:27:20 <liquidat>	That shouldn't be integrated!
Feb 13 04:27:46 <Kevin_Kofler>	It being insecure would be a good reason not to 
install it by default, of course.
Feb 13 04:28:01 <rdieter>	yeah, that warning about use on multi-user 
machines, is troubling.
Feb 13 04:28:26 <Kevin_Kofler>	Why would you use talk on a single-user 
machine? ;-)
Feb 13 04:28:47 <rdieter>	exactly.
Feb 13 04:28:47 -->	kmaraas (n=kmaraas at 115.84-48-67.nextgentel.com) hat 
#fedora-devel betreten
Feb 13 04:29:04 <liquidat>	Is someone packaging speedcrunch?
Feb 13 04:29:10 <rdieter>	heck, that's what irc, jabber, etc, is for 
these days.
Feb 13 04:29:23 <rdieter>	re: speedcrunch, not yet, afaik.
Feb 13 04:29:47 <rdieter>	I should have put that one in the "not yet 
packaged for Fedora" section.
Feb 13 04:30:14 <rdieter>	any other questions/comments regarding package 
splits?
Feb 13 04:30:25 <liquidat>	I will try to submit speedcrunch tomorrow...
Feb 13 04:30:31 <rdieter>	thanks.
Feb 13 04:30:59 <rdieter>	the splitting business may involve a wee-bit of 
work, but I think it will be worth it (hopefully, we'll have to time)
Feb 13 04:31:20 <rdieter>	recall: F7t2 freeze is 02/20
Feb 13 04:31:53 <liquidat>	I agree...
Feb 13 04:32:01 <rdieter>	ok, last topic on my informal agenda: app 
defaults/setup.
Feb 13 04:32:26 -->	fedorared (n=john at fedora/fedorared) hat #fedora-devel 
betreten
Feb 13 04:32:52 <rdieter>	In short, setup things so that stuff works as 
sanely as possible out of the box.
Feb 13 04:33:42 <rdieter>	one optimization that may be controversial was 
to make pdf the default print output, and make kpdf the default print preview.
Feb 13 04:34:04 <rdieter>	(maybe just pdf for print preview, anyway)
Feb 13 04:34:17 <liquidat>	I tried that one on my local machine, and it 
worked.
Feb 13 04:34:49 <liquidat>	The question is how much work this is on the 
packages, but in other cases I would prefer kpdf - the old one was really old.
Feb 13 04:35:20 <rdieter>	this part, I don't see as being much work (less 
than pkg splitting, in any case)
Feb 13 04:35:46 <liquidat>	What are reasons against, than?
Feb 13 04:36:35 <rdieter>	I can't think of any reason, but I'm biased.
Feb 13 04:37:02 <rdieter>	any other ideas for possible app/setup 
customization to improve user experience?
Feb 13 04:37:34 <liquidat>	Well, it would be cool to have another style
Feb 13 04:37:44 <Kevin_Kofler>	Have you seen jkatz's proposed list of spins 
yet? http://katzj.livejournal.com/400723.html
Feb 13 04:38:15 <liquidat>	Polyester together with Fedora colours would be 
nicer than just the plain KDE.
Feb 13 04:38:18 <Kevin_Kofler>	There's no full KDE spin in that plan, just a 
live CD...
Feb 13 04:38:22 <rdieter>	yes, I saw his rough draft (though I forgot to 
comment on it)
Feb 13 04:38:44 <rdieter>	yeah, we plan on making a full/regular spin 
first, then livecd too (if we have time)
Feb 13 04:39:32 <rdieter>	liquidat: I'm strongly against anything buy 
plastik as the default, thought we can include other styles in the spin.
Feb 13 04:40:10 <liquidat>	rdieter: Ok, than plastik :)
Feb 13 04:40:24 <rdieter>	new/flashy styles are cute, but are also a 
source of irritating bugs.
Feb 13 04:41:07 <Kevin_Kofler>	Just make sure the good old Bluecurve libs end 
up on the spin.
Feb 13 04:41:11 <rdieter>	I'd feel a lot better going with something 
tried-and-true, which still qualifies as quasi-cool.
Feb 13 04:41:48 <rdieter>	yeah, Bluecurve is/will-be in redhat-artwork 
(or whatever they end up naming it), no getting away from that, likely.
Feb 13 04:42:32 <liquidat>	Hm.. I have no other ideas...
Feb 13 04:42:35 <Kevin_Kofler>	There's currently a proposal on the ML to split 
off the Bluecurve binaries from redhat-artwork to avoid multilibbing all that 
data.
Feb 13 04:42:47 <rdieter>	speaking of theming, I'm also strongly leaning 
toward using crystalsvg icon theme.
Feb 13 04:43:00 <liquidat>	Which one is the default?
Feb 13 04:43:08 <rdieter>	echo looks nice, but dev's seem only luke-warm 
to address kde-specific issues.
Feb 13 04:43:42 <rdieter>	Fc-6 defaults to Bluecurve icon theme, I 
believe.
Feb 13 04:43:52 <rdieter>	I propose to use crystalsvg.
Feb 13 04:43:59 <rdieter>	for F7 kde spin, anyway.
Feb 13 04:44:35 <rdieter>	unless a miracle occurs and echo gets fixed in 
the meantime.
Feb 13 04:45:02 <liquidat>	So lets take crystalsvg - isn't that even the 
default for KDE vanilla?
Feb 13 04:45:08 <rdieter>	yup.
Feb 13 04:46:14 <rdieter>	cool thing is, all/most of the customizations, 
and theming defaults will be contained in a separate .noarch pkg.
Feb 13 04:46:44 <rdieter>	Which will allow local/site admins to customize 
things easily by replacing/updating that one bit.
Feb 13 04:47:04 <rdieter>	Or even better, use kde's kiosktool to do it.
Feb 13 04:47:11 <liquidat>	Hm, sounds nice :)
Feb 13 04:47:53 <rdieter>	I initially named the "defaults" pkg, 
kde-config (but that's confusing, since kdelibs includes a binary named 
kde-config).
Feb 13 04:48:00 <--	daMaestro hat sich getrennt ("Leaving")
Feb 13 04:48:10 <rdieter>	I think I'm leaning toward calling it 
kde-settings instead.
Feb 13 04:49:06 <liquidat>	kde-settings-default (so others can add 
kde-settings-corporatebranding or whatever)
Feb 13 04:50:01 <rdieter>	sure, that makes sense too.
Feb 13 04:50:11 <Kevin_Kofler>	kde-default-settings would be more grammatical.
Feb 13 04:51:15 <rdieter>	even better.
Feb 13 04:51:45 <liquidat>	Whatever :)
Feb 13 04:52:16 <rdieter>	if anybody listening knows or is near 
than at redhat.com, poke him to wake up.
Feb 13 04:53:44 <rdieter>	that's pretty much all I had in mind, any other 
topics?
Feb 13 04:54:15 *	rdieter had been hoping than would have been here.
Feb 13 04:55:17 <liquidat>	A question: will we include non-security bug 
fixes when they appear?
Feb 13 04:55:23 <liquidat>	I have the ICQ problem in my mind.
Feb 13 04:55:44 <rdieter>	A big, it depends, but usually, yes.
Feb 13 04:56:08 <rdieter>	we don't want to push big pkg updates for every 
small bug fix either.
Feb 13 04:56:43 <rdieter>	there's a balance.  (I'd argue the kopete icq 
warranted being fixed)
Feb 13 04:57:19 <liquidat>	Ah, ok.
Feb 13 04:58:06 <rdieter>	otherwise, review, review, review.  Have I 
mentioned package reviews? (:
Feb 13 04:59:30 <liquidat>	;)
Feb 13 05:00:02 <liquidat>	Well, I have almost no real experience there, 
but I will try to push up speedcrunch (ha, cmake one, never tried that in a 
spec file before).
Feb 13 05:00:03 <rdieter>	good night everybody, we'll reconvene tomorrow 
at 20:00 UTC
Feb 13 05:00:40 -->	sankarshan (n=sankarsh at 202.80.58.210) hat #fedora-devel 
betreten
Feb 13 05:00:43 <Kevin_Kofler>	Would that be today for us in Europe?
Feb 13 05:01:02 <rdieter>	probably, Tue 20:00 UTC.
Feb 13 05:01:31 <rdieter>	(another time recently suggested on the KDE SIG 
wiki).
Feb 13 05:01:43 <liquidat>	I'm not sure if I will be there, but good 
night!
Feb 13 05:01:49 <liquidat>	Or good morning almost ;)
Feb 13 05:01:50 <rdieter>	thanks liquidat, Kevin_Kofler.
Feb 13 05:01:59 <--	liquidat (n=liquidat at 4560-02bg04.stw-wh.uni-jena.de) 
hat #fedora-devel verlassen ("Konversation terminated!")
Feb 13 05:02:30 <--	rdieter hat sich getrennt (Remote closed the 
connection)
Feb 13 05:02:30 ---	Getrennt ().