[Development] Qbs development

Wed Sep 15 12:52:24 CEST 2021

Hi Lars, Tuukka,

 > I also would very much like you to stay here.

AFAIK, a main issue here not about of maintenance behaviour. A main 
issue in the access right on the Qbs project. F.e. right now it is hard 
to maintenance the CI integration with the GitHub, to generate the 
pre-compiled releases and other stuff (maybe Ivan can explain a betetr).

Also, a main issue is for the CI for the bare-metal toolchains, where we 
need to use the self-runners instead of Docker containers (there are 
impossible to use the dockers).

So, if you want to be Qbs stayed in the QtCompany infrastructure, then 
you need to help us a bit, e.g. provide some separate server resources 
(e.g. two VMs with Linux && Windows OS installed) where we can setup all 
required stuff to work with CI. ;)

Because right now I use own host PC as self-runner for CI, what is very 
bad and non-stable approach.  ;)

BR, Denis

15.09.2021 13:32, Lars Knoll пишет:
> Hi Ivan,
>
> I also would very much like you to stay here. QBS is great project and 
> something that came out of the Qt work and still has very strong ties 
> to it.
>
> I am fully with Tuukka that what we want is to make it a good 
> experience and easy for people to work here in the project. Blocking 
> other peoples work is certainly not in line with this.
>
> The governance model has the ’no confidence’ clause for a reason and 
> if you have tried other means before, I can and will of course arrange 
> such a vote.
>
> Cheers,
> Lars
>
>
>> On 15 Sep 2021, at 12:18, Tuukka Turunen <tuukka.turunen at qt.io 
>> <mailto:tuukka.turunen at qt.io>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>> I would not like Qbs development to move away from the Qt project. It 
>> is very unfortunate that you have had bad experience and misbehavior 
>> from one approver. We want to constantly improve the experience of 
>> working within the Qt project and naturally this kind of incidents 
>> are not doing that. Therefore, it is very good that you have raised 
>> the topic in the mailing list, as many were not aware of it earlier. 
>> On the positive side, I do not think there is any general hostility 
>> towards Qbs within the Qt projects – on the contrary I can see a lot 
>> of good co-operation.
>> Yours,
>>                 Tuukka
>>
>> *From:*Development <development-bounces at qt-project.org 
>> <mailto:development-bounces at qt-project.org>> on behalf of Иван 
>> Комиссаров <abbapoh at gmail.com <mailto:abbapoh at gmail.com>>
>> *Date:*Tuesday, 14. September 2021 at 20.49
>> *To:*Lars Knoll <lars.knoll at qt.io <mailto:lars.knoll at qt.io>>
>> *Cc:*Qt development mailing list <development at qt-project.org 
>> <mailto:development at qt-project.org>>
>> *Subject:*Re: [Development] Qbs development
>>
>> Thanks for the response.
>> I can provide a third option - we can move Qbs out of the Qt 
>> Governance Model by moving to GitHub. I have raised this topic on our 
>> Discord server and the community overall seems positive - there were 
>> several votes for the migration and no votes against. This migration 
>> might be healthy to Qbs as a lot of newcomers are not familiar with 
>> Gerrit but familiar with GitHub and it’s pull-request model.
>> Also, it will clearly separate who can approve/reject patches to Qbs 
>> and to the rest of Qt world.
>> If there are no objections, I will create an INFRA issue about the 
>> migration - it should not be very hard to do.
>> Ivan
>>
>>
>>     14 сент. 2021 г., в 17:33, Lars Knoll <lars.knoll at qt.io
>>     <mailto:lars.knoll at qt.io>> написал(а):
>>
>>      Hi,
>>     Let’s also take up the formal part of the request.
>>
>>
>>         On 13 Sep 2021, at 22:59, Иван Комиссаров <abbapoh at gmail.com
>>         <mailto:abbapoh at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>         Also, some actions might be taken to prevent from happening
>>         in the future - if technically possible, I’d like to request
>>         the revoke of his approver rights on the Qbs project as per
>>         this part of the Qt Governance Model:
>>         «In extreme circumstances Approver privileges can be revoked
>>         by a vote of no confidence, proposed by an existing Approver
>>         or Maintainer and arranged by the Chief Maintainer. Privilege
>>         revocation requires a two-thirds majority vote of those
>>         Approvers and Maintainers who express an opinion.» [3]
>>
>>
>>
>>         On 14 Sep 2021, at 12:34, Richard Weickelt
>>         <richard at weickelt.de <mailto:richard at weickelt.de>> wrote:
>>         The question is whether this is an abuse of approver rights.
>>
>>         This is a relevant question for the Qt project. Any person
>>         with approver
>>         rights has the ability to cause a production stop. Ivan is
>>         asking for help
>>         in this particular case and I am seconding his request.
>>
>>
>>
>>     Ivan and Richard, do I understand you correctly that you’d like
>>     to have a formal vote of no confidence according to QUIP-2?
>>     Please understand that this clause is meant as a last resort,
>>     when other solutions have failed.
>>
>>
>>     We will also need to consider that the Qt Governance Model only
>>     defines global Approver rights for all of the Qt Project. The
>>     request was however limited to QBS, so we would need to find a
>>     way to handle this. I can only see two options there, either we
>>     start extending our governance model here (can be done with a
>>     lazy consensus on that extension), or change the scope to the
>>     whole project having much more severe implications.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     Ossi, I (and probably others on this mailing list) would also
>>     like to hear your view on this. As I stated in my previous mail
>>     in this thread, I strongly believe, that the people doing the
>>     actual work decide on the direction and individual changes. The
>>     Governance model states the same, the maintainer takes the
>>     decision in case no agreement can be reached. As far as I can
>>     see, your actions are conflicting with this.
>>
>>
>>     Thank you,
>>     Lars
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20210915/96335e3f/attachment-0001.html>