Don’t confuse @staff with @team. The latter is also listed here. I have no opinion on the matter of Flatpak and Snap. I don’t use either. If it is popular, expected to be available in a desktop system, and would be put to good use - it is worth considering distributing it.
I too would like @team to grow. I don’t know what a “link up” means, but here are a few, recent ideas:
A pet peeve of mine is the delay between KDE releasing Frameworks, Plasma, and Applications, and them being tested and made available in Chakra. On average, it takes three weeks. A quick glance at Arch Linux suggests that they test the packages and make them available within 24 hours. For this year, I’d personally prefer to see that the process is well documented and completed within a week, on average.
Well, by default Chakra came with Calligra suite, not Libreoffice. Calligra is a very basic office software suite and much smaller in term of size, but i do experienced compatibility issues with it, so i switched to LO, and LO worked fine.
I worked at a company in a room with web developers, they had many compatibility issues with MS office, and the different versions of it. They was happy if the customer accepted LibreOffice to use our services with it.
In my current job, i have to use office 365. My god, the Excel in it have animated cells, so inserting some new data to cells takes quite long… I installed LO for myself because of this. Now my life is happy again.
When I refer link up I mean to estabilish an agreement with an university. Chakra could be a great project for students as much as it would be for researchers. And this could determine that a larger number of people would be available to help develop Chakra. Or, at least, they would take some part of the tasks burden that the team has to carry on.
If this could help I could try to develop this idea because I work with a portuguese university in projects for Africa.
I would love to volunteer myself to be part of the team/staff. Sadly I don’t have enough skills to do it nor do I have the time to develop them in order to be eligible to be a tester or be part of the developers.
Bur I know some people…
About the readiness of the new packages. Well I don’t think it’s a bad idea to have some more delay as long as things come out perfect. So I don’t see a problem about Arch developers beeing faster (they are bigger in numbers, right? ) but I do understand your point since Chakra has an ideal in it’s origins.
Well I have been using LO for most of the time as I used to work mainly with text processor.
But lately I have been asked to deal with a project that relies on excel spreadsheet. And the macros…well, LO doesn’t cope with them too well and I don’t have the time to tweak it.
I really enjoy using Chakra (I really do) but lately my time has been taken away from me. Along with a new professional move I had a daughter 3 months ago and that burdens my time. I don’t even watch football anymore.
But I always felt that Chakra has a number of great conditions to reach a larger number of users. It runs pretty well in my very old laptop and it let’s me do all that I need when it comes to leisure use of the computer. Still has it shortcomings when the use I give to it is professional. Well, not really the OS’s shortcomings but it’s more of my own shortcomings on computer skills.
This sounds good, but I have no idea on how to go about it, so I’d like to know more. Establishing any sort of formal agreements is difficult in Chakra, due to the lack of leadership or any form of standard voting procedure, or even method of communication. I have at times arranged for sponsorships and services paid for despite there being no consensus (or even replies), but such actions can backfire.
I don’t know if it could help or what it entails, specifically, but if you are willing to continue developing the idea, I will of course listen and try to understand.
I’ve spent a lot of time writing documentation, most recently the build system wiki in order to ensure that more can learn how to create packages for Chakra. I’d welcome feedback as to if what I write is understandable, if I use unnecessarily complex words or phrasing, if I put things in an order that makes sense, and so on. If you don’t know about the topic, and thereby don’t have any subject matter bias… all the better?
It’s not like we have some rigorous testing process or predefined workflow (although I’d like to have that, and have written suggestions). I can’t back this statement up by facts - and I don’t mean to offend anyone, but if packages stay in [testing] for weeks, or don’t get built at all in the first place, I’d say it’s due to lack of manpower/assistance/vigour/vitality - pick your word. Just because packages are in [testing] doesn’t mean that they are necessarily being tested or improved upon. In Getting @testers involved at an earlier stage I suggested a very basic way of signing off on packages, indicating that they are working and ready to be moved to the stable repositories.
I can write documentation, improve and simplify the scripts used to manage the official repositories, continue work on automating packaging (either Qt or Linux is next, now that Plasma etc. are done), and I have elaborate ideas on how to make better use of GitLab and enable newcomers to contribute. However, aside from the topics I already linked to, and the many issues I’ve opened where I need feedback - I do not know how to make Chakra popular or attract new contributors.
Truth be told, my Dell laptop on which I installed Chakra way back is broken (it’s a hardware issue) so I haven’t used Chakra very often at all over the past four years. I still feel obliged to help out, and might install it once the new release is out.