On 03/13/2014 07:49 AM, Laurent Rineau wrote:
> Le Thursday 13 March 2014 07:12:11 Rex Dieter a écrit :
>> On 03/13/2014 06:51 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
>>> The OP's question
>>> was whether this is meant to replace the KDE Desktop (which like it or
>>> not is the term most people are used to). I still don't know the answer
>>> to that question.
>> OK, let's clear that up. The answer is "yes"
> Patrick is right that the page about "Fedora Plasma Product" should emphasis
> about the KDE rebranding.
FWIW, the initial happened awhile ago (late 2010), e.g.
(website/spin site rebranding)
So, sure, we could take this opportunity to further refine things,
though not sure if that should a particular *emphasis* or not.
F20 fully updated to KDE 4.12.3-1, x86_64, NVidia GT630 graphics with
the proprietary driver.
This morning everything was working. This afternoon, after updating
KDE, I no longer have a keyboard.
The KB does work in a non-desktop console, and also under Gnome (where
I'm typing this), but in no part of KDE.
KB hardware is a Microsoft Wireless Keyboard 800 connected via a USB
dongle. The mouse connects through the same dongle and is working
fine. That particular model is not listed as an option in the KDE
Settings widget, so I've been selecting "Microsoft Wireless Multimedia
This could be something silly related to evdev, but I've no idea what,
so ideas are welcome.
On Tue March 11 2014 6:45:48 PM John Aldrich wrote:
> On Tue March 11 2014 11:35:22 PM Reindl Harald wrote:
> > > I'm confused... is this to REPLACE the KDE desktop or just work along
> > > side
> > > KDE? From the announcement verbiage it sounds as if you're REPLACING
> > > KDE,
> > > but from the details it sounds like it's just a renaming of the KDE
> > > desktop
> > KDE == Plasma
But in the announcement it says this will replace the KDE spin. So why are
we "replacing KDE spin" if this IS KDE?
On 03/10/2014 03:56 PM, Maciek Borzecki wrote:
> Some time ago I have reported a bug for dnf
> where 'dnf grouperase <whatever>' fails without clear reason. Did some
> investigation and it seems that groups.xml in RH KDE repo is different
> from what I see in regular Fedora repositories.
Thanks for the pointer.
I'm pretty sure I just copyied the groups.xml stuff from what fedora was
using... way back when. That said, I don't think there's any need for
it now, so I'll look into simply removing it, and regen the repo metadata.
Is there any way of setting up a kill file in KNode?
Preferably for a particular newsgroup.
(I'm actually concerned with sci.math
which is now exceeding 95% spam, from 5 or 6 offenders.)
I looked in the KNode Handbook, but didn't see anything.
e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
Some time ago I have reported a bug for dnf
where 'dnf grouperase <whatever>' fails without clear reason. Did some
investigation and it seems that groups.xml in RH KDE repo is different
from what I see in regular Fedora repositories.
In groups.xml from Fedora repositories, for every <group> node, there
are <id> and <name> nodes. However, in KDE repo the nodes are named
<_id> and <_name> respectively. This will cause dnf to fail as while
the xml is loaded, node names become class members and the rest of the
code relies on particular member naming.
At this stage I don't know whether it's a problem with KDE repo or
dnf, but it's worth noting that yum does not seem to suffer from
similar problem. So I'd guess dnf still has work to do before it
becomes Fedora's yum replacement.
Any ideas where this discrepancy between schema of both files might come from?
Just finished up initial batch of kde-4.12.3 builds for centos6 (and rhel6)
in our kde-unstable repo
A few items not included:
kde-print-manager (cups too old)
kopete (incompatible compiler flags)
rocs (boost too old)
srpms live at:
----- Original Message -----
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Adam Williamson" <awilliam(a)redhat.com>
> > To: "Discussions about development for the Fedora desktop"
> > <desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 5, 2014 3:20:06 AM
> > Subject: Re: KDE integration/status for Workstation
> > On Tue, 2014-03-04 at 19:59 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > During the default DE discussions, a number of WG members expressed
> > > interest in keeping KDE as a release blocking DE for Workstation. QA
> > > is now asking FESCo about KDE's status as well in
> > > https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1243
> > >
> > > So if KDE is going to be a release blocking DE for Workstation, we
> > > need to figure out how exactly it gets installed and what manner it
> > > would be tested in. In the above ticket I came up with the following:
> > >
> > > install the Workstation live image, install KDE through
> > > software-installer (if necessary), log into KDE from GDM after
> > > install, test
> > >
> > > However, that was entirely off the top of my head. Would the live
> > > image be large enough to contain the KDE Workstation already or would
> > > a user/QA tester need to install it through the software-installer?
> > > What tests should be done? Etc.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > This with my Personal Opinion hat on, not representing QA:
> > I'm not sure all/most people who actually want to use Fedora KDE are
> > likely to be sold on doing it by downloading what they will see as
> > 'GNOME', installing that, and then installing KDE on top of it. I think
> > this will be fine for some folks, but there'll be a significant
> > constituency which just wants a KDE image.
> > In fact we might be creating a bit of a problem, because I can see both
> > "want KDE as an alternative desktop on top of the Workstation product"
> > and "just want Fedora KDE" as two entirely legitimate and viable
> > constituencies, which sort of means we've just created a bunch of extra
> > work for ourselves. I'm not sure I see a clever magical solution to
> > that, though. Engage brain cells...
> > --
> Well my take is that there will never be a solution that makes everyone
> but in my mind the expectation here has always been that the people who would
> not be happy about the proposed solution would end up focusing their energy
> doing a remix. Because there isn't really a way we can make a product and at
> same time be a solution for people who essentially want a different product.
Yep, and that probably leads back to the question if we want or don't want to
provide more products than we currently have so far (three). And to be honest,
I like idea having more products but with very high bar (that should apply
for all products) - to avoid a situation of having dozens of products but
still be inclusive.
There was FESCo ticket https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1197 - it's now
closed with resolution: "AGREED: Close for now until the current products are
released at least once and/or anyone proposes a new product" and it's states
that the bar should be relatively high too.
KDE would be a great example of such first product - pretty strong KDE SIG
team, that consists of a few very active community members and Red Hatters,
proved to be able to solve release blockers (and pretty tough release blockers),
with quite a big user base and last few years known as one of the best and
most polished KDE experience (from distribution POV).
1. establish formal KDE WG from the initial KDE SIG members
2. create formal PRD
3. create Technical Specifications (based on WS Tech Specs or future Base
4. show commitment, provide resources for other teams - QA (test cases,
test days, help with release matrix coverage), marketing etc.
5. get approved - does not have to be for F21, start line would be pretty
late but do not block it, if KDE WG would be able to make it
For the idea of having for example Scientific products based on KDE - I don't
like it as these topic specific spin like things should be desktop agnostic
and really done on top of existing desktops in Software Installer (GNOME, KDE
whatever). And create spins/formulas whatever only when it's really needed
(but then it would be more remix).
One another thought - it could serve as a place for desktops that would not
fulfil WS WG requirements but could fulfil KDE WG requirements (there are
a lot of new Qt/KDE based desktops appearing recently)...
CC'ing KDE mailing list. Due to some other stuff, I'm not very active
recently in discussion but initially KDE SIG was more inclined to own
product, then I saw a few people more inclined being part of WS WG and
now I think it's clearly steering back to spin/product. Remix would be
suicide - even KDE SIG is pretty big team, active, with healthy
community, it would mean a lot of duplication etc.
> desktop mailing list