I’ll be whatever person I like thanks.

And most open source software starts as a one person job. And as you approach something that other people see the value in, you’ll likely attract people who will help.

For the most extreme example, see the Linux Kernel itself.

Someone has to start the ball rolling, and if it’s something you want, it may as well be you.

Office 365 also refers to the desktop apps as well as the web versions, has done for many years now. Though I suppose it’s all copilot 365 now.

Source: Am office worker where we use office 365, and we all use the native system software, with the browser versions as for quick editing when elsewhere.

Go make one then?

They ruled that for copyright to apply, a human must have authored the work.

Now if an AI spits out code that’s a duplicate of a humans authored work. Then you could argue the author is actually the original human. And this it would be covered by their original copyright

Fedora, I think, is pretty good for a normal user.

Yeah, I imagine there’s some QT bits for implementing a lot of it, if it detects them being available. Not being massively familiar with QT or how those two apps make use of it, I can’t assume they’d be making use of the components that’d implement KDEs custom extensions. So you know shrugs

I mean many Wayland compositors is kinda like old browsers at the moment. They all implement a common spec and then implement a bunch of their own extensions to get features the spec doesn’t allow for. And apps have to be aware of these custom extensions to make use of them. So in the KDE case, I imagine a lot of their apps are aware of KDEs own extensions to Wayland. But it doesn’t mean all of them are.

People who find success can, sometimes, become arrogant and become blind to other factors contributing to their success. Just enough failure can keep you humble. Pretty typical human reactions.

Does it, if you can work on the normal application code, there’s no reason you can’t work on the lower levels of applications. It’s all just code. Ramp up might take a bit more time, but I wouldn’t expect horrendously so. As long as your patterns make sense and what is there is written well enough and is not a spaghetti monster in the making, any one should be able to pick it up.

Time to go back to email lists. Anyone can come along sure. But it’s only going to be the most determined.

I would have thought that you fix it locally, git commit, and regenerate the patch set again. Maybe with optional squashing of commits so each patch set doesn’t keep growing.

I don’t think the code is the problem they are cleaning up. I think they just want to remove the contributor from the history.