[lubuntu-devel] LXQt

Phill. Whiteside phillwuk at gmail.com
Tue May 3 15:31:32 UTC 2016


Hi Walter,

I'm not sure where it states we are not going to attempt a release for
16.10? The initial assertion by Julien to *just* use lxqt from debian was
made before it was apparent that xorg / desktop etc. are not in that
meta-package. They are all flavour specific. Jorn (one of our devs) and Alf
(agaida on irc) have discussed the various packages and there is a bug fix
pending for the mail application. We also discovered the mis-match in repos
which has been forwarded to Julien for he and Alf to have a chat about once
Julien returns from his sabbatical. Between emails, chats on Facebook and
on various IRC channels I have pulled together all that information as up
to date as possible (Been a long time since I rebuilt a package to confirm
the cause of a bug!). Nothing clandestine, just people on different media
whilst getting an up to date status report from Developers so that we know
where things are up to.

Regards,

Phill.

On 3 May 2016 at 16:17, ∅ <maps.backward at gmail.com> wrote:

> I find it rather alarming and surprising to hear the notion that we do not
> plan on even trying to ship Lubuntu with LXQt for Yakkety. This is a marked
> change from everything I've been hearing.
>
> That being said, I'd like to hear some more clarity on why and what
> exactly the plan is. That being said, conversation logs are essential. It's
> annoying that private channels seem to be appropriate places to decide such
> sweeping turn of events.
>
> Including the rest of the team in such discussions is imperative in order
> to not undermine the team. An IRC meeting is a good forum for such things.
> If this is not possible, the next best thing is a summary to the public
> mailing list with reference to the logs of the conversation.
>
> Anything else lacks transparency and ultimately violates the core of what
> an open source project is. We have few members in our team and we risk
> losing them if we continue to practice this way.
>
> If the media was aware of this, there would certainly be a public outcry.
> Regardless of intentions, this is not very open.
> On May 3, 2016 5:20 AM, "Simon Quigley" <tsimonq2 at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>
>> Greetings,
>>
>> I didn't ask for Y to be untouched, although I would like you not to mess
>> with it. :)
>>
>> It's much easier for people to follow along if it's on one medium where
>> everyone can participate. I've seen little random tidbits on #lxde,
>> #debian-lxqt, and #lubuntu-devel but not enough to tell me what's going on.
>> #phillw is NOT an LXQt channel and if you want to be public with your
>> conversations, like an open project should, please use an official channel.
>>
>> And if they are in more than one medium, when you change the
>> instructions, it would be beneficial to send something to the ML stating
>> all the points made, or something along those lines. We all have an email
>> address, so carbon-copying exists.
>>
>> I'd like to reiterate that I'm frustrated that not all of us were
>> involved, let alone informed, on the discussions. We just have this final
>> decision that doesn't have general consensus but rather a hard-set,
>> non-transparent instruction set in place. While I recognize you are all not
>> on the same medium, please just send something to the ML before making the
>> decision. That's transparency, what this project is supposed to be.
>>
>> --
>> 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/20160503/62cda877/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Lubuntu-devel mailing list