Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: More KDE Applications Will Now Work On Wayland

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,335

    Default More KDE Applications Will Now Work On Wayland

    Phoronix: More KDE Applications Will Now Work On Wayland

    The KWindowSystem framework that interactions with the desktop's windowing system has been refactored to be more versatile and can now support Wayland alongside X11 on Linux...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTU5NDQ

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    92

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phoronix View Post
    Phoronix: More KDE Applications Will Now Work On Wayland

    The KWindowSystem framework that interactions with the desktop's windowing system has been refactored to be more versatile and can now support Wayland alongside X11 on Linux...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTU5NDQ
    Why was the image (clearly taken from the article/blog) watermarked with the Phoronix logo?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,520

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bakgwailo View Post
    Why was the image (clearly taken from the article/blog) watermarked with the Phoronix logo?
    I think a script automatically does that for any images that appear on the site.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    108

    Default

    This is absolutely not acceptable. This is a clear copyright violation. My blog is under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 and the image was CC Attribution-ShareAlike non commercial (I just changed it to remove the non-commercial).

    To the Phoronix owner: please add the required attribution. I find it not acceptable to brand a copyrighted image.

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mgraesslin View Post
    This is absolutely not acceptable. This is a clear copyright violation. My blog is under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 and the image was CC Attribution-ShareAlike non commercial (I just changed it to remove the non-commercial).

    To the Phoronix owner: please add the required attribution. I find it not acceptable to brand a copyrighted image.
    It was mentioned the image was from your blog, but I can just delete it, since as mentioned by other poster it just universally appears on all images to prevent hot linking.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    108

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    It was mentioned the image was from your blog, but I can just delete it, since as mentioned by other poster it just universally appears on all images to prevent hot linking.
    It's CC, it's not needed that you delete it. Just add the required information to the image. This is more a general thing, it's also when you integrate any other screenshots from any source. Saying where it's from is not really a good solution for CC.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    105

    Default Re

    "Martin won't be fixing those back-ends" - it's more of "he can't" because he doesn't have the commercial/proprietary software, he needs a license for any of the commercial OS.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,029

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alliancemd View Post
    "Martin won't be fixing those back-ends" - it's more of "he can't" because he doesn't have the commercial/proprietary software, he needs a license for any of the commercial OS.
    Of course he could. It's entirely possible to look at the code, understand exactly what is going on, create the patches, and then send them off to someone else who can test and ensure they are correct. Repeat until it's working.

    But that's rather inefficient, and probably not a good use of his time versus someone elses.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    108

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smitty3268 View Post
    Of course he could. It's entirely possible to look at the code, understand exactly what is going on, create the patches, and then send them off to someone else who can test and ensure they are correct. Repeat until it's working.

    But that's rather inefficient, and probably not a good use of his time versus someone elses.
    And it's also not a good use of the time for whoever would have to apply the patches on Windows to just get a compile error.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •