Gnome kills KDE

[Thaodan]

Surrendering code to Qt means going into CLA-land. KDE is not Qt. Anyway I suggest you look at the numbers for Qt contributors. Do you really think all the missing KDE hackers are within Qt now? You need the redo the math.

Anyway will you point out a few ex-KDE hackers who live exclusively in Qt hacking on stuff who formerly belonged in KDE?

You constantly ignore that KDE gets a BSD licensed Qt when Qt is closed...

[mgraesslin]

Surrendering code to Qt means going into CLA-land. KDE is not Qt.

Nonesense. Qt is protected by the FreeQt Foundation. I do not have any problem with contributing code to Qt.

Do you really think all the missing KDE hackers are within Qt now? You need the redo the math.

Anyway will you point out a few ex-KDE hackers who live exclusively in Qt hacking on stuff who formerly belonged in KDE?

sure, I know a whole bunch of them. Some are working directly at Digia, some are working for KDAB, some for Intel. They are all still KDE hackers, but just don't have that much time anymore to work on KDE directly and that's just fine. I mean I spent also quite some time today hacking on Qt ;-) Just think about the fact that Qt Contributor Summit was co-hosted with Akademy.

[jrch2k8]

stop feeding the troll, he is like bo$$ no matter what you say or do regardless if your are community dev or an actual KDE dev he won't stop his retarded completely outrageous without any rational basis conspiration theories from the parallel universe where his paranoid schizophrenia take him.

this thread in a nutshell is like trying to have a rational talk with a monkey to make him realize that throw shit is not playing baseball

[DanL]

Do you accept KDE's decline as a fact, or do you believe half the contributors are hiding like ghosts in feature branches?

I didn't say anything about feature branches. Try to remember who said what (or just scroll up). Anyway...
I don't think your graph means anything other than a spike in activity during KDE4 development.

[DanL]

stop feeding the troll

I like to troll the trolls

he is like bo$$

Bozley's far more entertaining.

[mgraesslin]

Please specify what you mean by "protected".

-> http://www.kde.org/community/whatisk...foundation.php

[jrch2k8]

Bozley's far more entertaining.

well that is true

[mgraesslin]

I have no use of that link. Im very well aware of the foundation and its limitations. So Im asking you, why do you even care when it so vague and weak?

I gave you the link because it also contains links to the contracts between the Free Qt Foundation and Digia. I do not think that this contract is in any way vague or weak. You might find further information in this https://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-c...q3/000140.html thread on the KDE community mailing list. Members of the free qt foundation took the time to answer to the wrong claims issued by you (yes one of the two topics mentioned in the mail is a thread started by you). I highly recommend you to invest the time to read it. Also I recommend to read Mirko's answer on reddit, which is also quite good.

As a personal note: I think these people have more knowledge about these topics than you. I think you should trust their expertise.

[jrch2k8]

They say what I say.

Free Qt Foundation does NOT cover non-linux platforms, wayland or embedded linux.
Free Qt Foundation does NOT cover other version than "Qt Free".
Free Qt Foundation IS exclusive KDE, bcause no one outside KDE are repesented at the board.

I think it is great this is set in stone now, you should educate who ever falsely claim that KDE have some kind of super power and they can do ehat ever they want with Qt's lisence. Because it is not true.

you are either a very bad troll or a non-developer or really stupid or all the above plus an F in reading skills, you are reading Qt3 agreement[i guess you doing it on purpose] and again this agreement is for future code because the code that resides already in git and is LGPL will remain LGPL forever, if you bother to check Qt5.0/2 git contains all interesting platform as QPA plugin already as LGPL and will remain LGPL forever.

the few paragraph that your porpuselly focus on for trolling are from trolltech days where the Qt code was splitted per platform, that is not true anymore since is open governance and QPA remove the need of platform specific repositories.

Wayland is not a platform[OMG], embedded linux QT aka Qtopia don't exist anymore get out of your cave more oftenand get some sun in the meantime

[Vim_User]

They say what I say.

Free Qt Foundation does NOT cover non-linux platforms, wayland or embedded linux.
Free Qt Foundation does NOT cover other version than "Qt Free".
Free Qt Foundation IS exclusive KDE, bcause no one outside KDE are repesented at the board.

I think it is great this is set in stone now, you should educate who ever falsely claim that KDE have some kind of super power and they can do ehat ever they want with Qt's lisence. Because it is not true.

May I assume that you are lawyer specialized in software licenses and copyright? Otherwise your assumptions have no weight at all and you should let the professionals do their job, they are better in it than you are.
In the meantime I recommend to take all the time you use to praise Gnome and troll about KDE on Phoronix and use it to learn programming instead, this way you can be really useful to the Gnome community.