On Thu, 2024-02-08 at 20:43 +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Thu, Feb 8, 2024 at 12:33 PM Sérgio Basto <sergio@xxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2024-02-07 at 16:03 +0100, Marc Deop i Argemí wrote: > > > We are not banning nor deleting anything. We are not _supporting_ > > > it. > > > > > > you are removing X11 from the builds deliberately , when > > many people , members of Fedora on devel mailing list, express that > > they want have X11 , in fact we have many people that defend keep > > X11 . > > One thing that seems to be overlooked in many of the posts on this > thread: > > Nobody can *force* the KDE Plasma maintainers to do *anything*, just > like nobody can force *any* packager to do anything. nobody can force me use wayland , we volunteer maintain KDE Plasma X11 , why do you think, we want force someone to do anything ? they are force us do a new packages, they remove X11 without consensus, they can leave the packages alone . > Fedora a > volunteer-run project. We're mostly doing this "for fun" (or at > least, > some definition of "fun"). So if the KDE Plasma maintainers / the KDE > SIG decides that they do not want to keep supporting the Plasma / X11 > session, that is their choice. However, I am not sure whether I like > it or not that there's an ongoing effort to add this functionality > back with separate packages. > > For me, the only acceptable way to do this would be in a way that > does > in no way make maintaining the Plasma / Wayland packages more > difficult or burdensome, since the original intent of dropping the > Plasma / X11 session was to *lower* the maintenance burden. It is a false excuse and not true, is not more difficult nor burdensome, we had many burdensome with the default be wayland and hundreds of bugs opened and never fixed with crashes only on wayland session . > Adding > back the Plasma / X11 session with separate packages might cause > additional overhead for the KDE SIG (for example, needing to update > kwin-x11 whenever there is a kwin update). is the opposite, KDE SIG are causing additional overhead to who want use X11 and the package maintainer forcing use of wayland and why does the will of KDE SIG have to prevail? I also maintain many KDE packages and I had a overhead with wayland crashes > That would be the "usual" > way to handle this according to Fedora policies. > The usual is, if someone want maintain the package , they can maintain it, no one complains about an hypothetical burden > However, that would be counter to the original purpose of dropping > the > functionality from the packages maintained by the KDE SIG. But again, > nobody can *force* package maintainers to support something they > don't > want to support. They don't have support X11 , they have the work of keep the removal of X11 in their packages . Other thing that KDE SIG misses , is how testing , let says, as usual, some app crash , and we ask have you wayland session or X11 session, if you have wayland try X11 , if it runs at X11 and crash on wayland , this fact can help find the problem and not the opposite . also in kde-wayland you can run in x11 envoirment with env QT_QPA_PLATFORM=xcb So just thinking removing this part of the functionalities on KDE , IMHO is lack of knowledge of graphics and bad for Fedora. IMHO the future is have both technologies and not replace it Is very sad read that some people think in remove it and force people use an technology that they think that don't have some important features and issues in his opinions , is less important than false argumentation , that will give burden . when they are burned to who want use X11 > So in this case, I think it would be good to have > something like a clarification to the Updates Policy (and / or other > policies, as necessary) for this case to resolve the contradiction - > something like "updates for KDE Plasma packages are not required to > be > coordinated with packages for the Plasma / X11 session". > > I'm also unsure how handling bug reports would best work in this > situation. People *will* report bugs against the wrong components, > causing additional work for the KDE SIG. (Hell, I'm getting bug > reports filed against elementary / Pantheon packages, and there's not > even a usable Pantheon session in Fedora yet!) > > Fabio > -- > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Do not reply to spam, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue -- Sérgio M. B. -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
