[lubuntu-devel] LXQt

[Phill. Whiteside]

Hi Simon,

the conversations have been carried out on Facebook, by email, on #lxde,
#debian-lxqt, #lubuntu-deve, #phillw in both open and closed chats. As I
informed you, the sum of those conversations and route is what has been
posted up. Not everyone is on this ML, nor in all the irc / Fb areas, thus
conversations have been across all forms of media required to answer
questions and clarify things. You asked that 'y' series be untouched, and
that is exactly what has happened, for xenial the method used is that
agreed with Alf after chats with Jorn about certain aspects (It was Alf who
told me the replacement font and with whom I worked finding the mis-match
bug in the repos).

Regards,

Phill.

On 3 May 2016 at 12:44, Simon Quigley <tsimonq2 at ubuntu.com> wrote:

> Greetings,
>
> On 05/03/16 03:12, Phill. Whiteside wrote:
> > Following on discussions with Julien, Jorn and Alf (agaida). The install
> > mehtod proposed by Jorn is adopted. With the clear statement that
> > lubuntu-qt for 16.04 does not, in fact, exist and this is merely  a
> > mockup of what it should look like once the tasksel stuff is all done.
> >
>
> You cite discussions with several people. Could the conversation be made
> public? If this was on IRC, why wasn't this done in #lubuntu-devel or
> #debian-lxqt? If this was over email, why didn't you carbon copy the
> appropriate mailing lists? So Joern is the only person who contributes to
> Lubuntu, LXQt, and trying to prepare Lubuntu for LXQt? If we are going to
> adopt a method in an *open* project, shouldn't *all* parties be involved
> before making a decision, no matter how right or how wrong? I guess I'm
> frustrated that I'm only hearing about this when it's implemented, and I'm
> in both #lubuntu-devel and #debian-lxqt, I check those daily.
>
> > At its heart, it uses the already existing lxqt meta package and then
> > adds on 'lubuntu' things. This will be the case when we do have a
> > release as the lxqt meta package will not contain things like desktop,
> > artwork etc. etc. This will be added by each distro.
>
> This is *exactly* what my metapackage does. In Yakkety, it uses the "lxqt"
> metapackage. In Xenial, it takes the dependencies right from the "lxqt"
> metapackage. Why is it so difficult to work together when I've spent a lot
> of time and effort making that package pristine? Why should we all of a
> sudden just adopt a package from another PPA when no discussion was had
> beforehand?
>
> I'm frustrated that this wasn't open for discussion at all. The least you
> could do is involve relevant parties.
>
> Please let me know I'm wrong, because I really hope I am.
>
> --
> Simon Quigley
> tsimonq2 at ubuntu.com
> tsimonq2 on Freenode
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/lubuntu-devel/attachments/20160503/a3a1e6c7/attachment.html>