Joining KDE

[pontaoski]

Preface: I am a KDE developer, so obviously I'm biased about the awesomeness of KDE :)

I think it would be pretty neat for this project to come join KDE. You can read about that process here: https://community.kde.org/Incubator

Why:

• Better in a community of like-minded folks than alone-KDE is a large community of enthusiastic Qt developers ( + lots of people of other talents)
• Access to KDE infrastructure (our GitLab instance, publically hosted documentation on https://develop.kde.org/ and https://api.kde.org/, and other stuff)
• Promotion: KDE is a very large and influential open source project (especially in the Qt sphere); being under KDE's umbrella can help QML.Net have some more visibility and potentially encourage adoption by users who wouldn't otherwise consider it
• Other benefits: https://manifesto.kde.org/benefits.html

I'd love to see you join KDE and definitely would sponsor you through the incubation process

[vadi2]

As a user my concern is - does it drag in KDE dependencies?

[pontaoski]

As a user my concern is - does it drag in KDE dependencies?

What? Joining KDE wouldn't cause that to happen; you shouldn't expect any substantial changes to the codebase simply because of the project joining a larger organisation.

[vadi2]

Dodging the question... I'd be concerned about a move in this direction.

[pontaoski]

The short/blunt answer is "no"

[pauldotknopf]

Is joining GitLab and moving documentation there a requirement?

[pauldotknopf]

Let me ask this, are there any requirements from us, as opposed to just "joining"?

[pontaoski]

Largest requirement would be moving infrastructure under KDE's umbrella, e.g. git repos, CI, etc.

Licensing stuff seems compatible w/ our licensing policies at an overview.

I don't recall any other large requirements.

[pontaoski]

ping, i would really like to see this awesome project move under KDE's umbrella :)

[prokopst]

@pontaoski frankly it doesn't seem like the owner is interested in continuing the project in the first place. See #240. Also qmlnet formally seems to be only one developer.

(I'm just a random guy who got discouraged to use Qml.Net due to #230 and #240 )

[RokeJulianLockhart]

@pontaoski, that is reason enough for this to be the last thing for @pauldotknopf to do, because it would allow the project to continue, whereas currently, it shall merely be forked into oblivion.