 Let's try this very, very fast. So it's time. So again, everyone, this time with my advisory board had on our go over advisory board is to build and maintain relationships with between KDE and our partners. We are around a dozen members with each one acting as a contact point for a particular partner. So very quickly, Adriana Lange continues, David, Ike, Helio, Kai, Lydia, myself, Sebastian, Thomas, Thomas is no longer around. That was a mistake. Sorry about that. So what we do, our main disabilities are organizing calls with the partners to inform them on KDE updates, act as contact persons to our support this ecosystem and be around to respond to it to any questions they have. Every one of us acts as a contact point for a particular partner. Since the last year, since the last academy to be precise, we collaborated with the board to help define the roles and responsibilities of the working groups, as Ike already mentioned. We had one advisory board call to discuss a lot of important developments and topics for us that we felt needed to be communicated with our practice. This included the status of Qt and the role of the Qt Foundation. I think Cornelius has a talk about that. If you want to learn more about that, all the changes, of course, to the Qt EV, the community events that took place and our new infrastructure changes. Finally, we are happy to welcome to new members in IOKA as a patron in Open UK as an NGO, and we would be happy to work more with them going forward. Our key goals going forward is we want to increase the number of calls we have with our contacts, be more active in nurturing current relationships and try to improve our overall collaboration with our partners. I'm not sure if we have time or in that limited time there was any time to raise questions, so I can answer them. If not, I can then continue to the next slide. Maybe we can answer any questions going forward. As an member of the financial working group, let me introduce you to our work as well there. Our mission at the financial working group is to support the Qt EV on multiple levels related to financial topics. We work with AV's Treasurer to make proposals, support commercial activities, evaluate financial reports, and devise the annual budget plan, on which we will talk more later on. We are currently a team of four active members as two membership ended over the last year. If you wish to help, we will soon be doing a call for new members, and we will be very happy to have you. Switching now, David, all right, Kim? This is me. All right, as I mentioned during the board report already, our income in 2019, fortunately, remained very stable. This is despite the fact that we made a conscious decision not to run end of year or mid-year fundraising campaigns. Instead, our income from supporting member and individual member donations increased to more than make up for that. Many thanks to everybody who donated. We also gained an additional new corporate supporting vendor slash patron this year, which is in YOKA. Last year, sorry. So in 2019, it was in YOKA and in 2020, it was content. We also outspent our income significantly on the chart that you're about to see. You will see that the expenses definitely are larger than the income. This is exactly as we had planned as a basic fact, because we are obligated to actually put our resources towards our goals, towards our mission statement as a nonprofit. So we cannot just hoard money. We actually need to put it towards the purpose that we have on file. In fact, we did not outspent our income by as much as we wanted, as we had intended. It is quite difficult for an organization that used to be rather thrifty to get into the habit of actually spending money. That said, of course, you also want to do so in a sustainable way without ignoring that in the future you may not have these resources again. So I think we've gotten the ball rolling and we've been using more funds than we did in the past and did so quite usefully. But there is certainly more that we can do with the resource that we have. We still spend mostly on events and travel expenditures related to events, as well as on the contractors that we work with, for example, in areas like promo or project coordination or event organization. We also have a new event in our roster of events, as was also mentioned earlier, which is the Epsapot Summit that we co-organized with our friends at NOPE. In the past, we had the RANDA meeting series, which sort of was now swapped out in the budget for the Epsapot Summit, as the RANDA meetings are currently not being held. So that sort of collapsed into breaking even there. And Academy sponsorship has developed very, very positively in previous years. We have more sponsors now, and we have more income. We also spend more on organizing Academy, but overall, this makes the event very stable and makes us look forward to future iterations of the event. So thank you very much to all of our sponsors. David. Just to quickly describe the charts of people who are listening only on audio, it's been stable, stable, stable, a northern cute con which we'll see on the next slide cancels out and stable. And then, come on, Blimey, look at that massive number. It's ridiculous. And then in next year, 2019, last year, it's a lot less than 2018, but it's still following this general trend of a slight upwards income every single year. And if we move on to expenses, if we move on to expenses, you'll see your income constantly outweighs what we're expending every year, even back to 2014. So we've been trying to increase our expenses continually because we've always had the problem of having too much money. And now in 2018, that problem that existed before is now a much, much bigger problem. So in 2019, we did expend, finally, we spent more and we get earned, which is something we've been needing to do for a while and it's a trend we can continue for quite a long time to come. Right. And to sort of anticipate the question there, how long would we be able to continue doing that about three or four years? If we just keep spending like we do now and our income doesn't change, we would be able to continue sort of driving that strategy for about three or four years. And then we would have to make some changes. The idea there, of course, is that in those three or four years, we actually grow our sustainable income through supporting memberships and individual donations. Let's have a look at 2019 in a little bit more detail. I'm not spending too much time on it, but this is an all new chart that we didn't have in previous years, as we have improved our accounting and have some higher fidelity data to show you this year. And this gives you some insight on what we actually spent money on and where our money comes from. So you will see there that patrons and supporting member donations make up more than half of our income. And academy sponsorships are a little bit more over a quarter there. And altogether, that's about 80% of our income. And then if you look at our expenses, you can see how income tracks to expenses. You will see that we spent quite a lot of an academy as well and we spent a lot of sprints. And when I say spent, what I mean there is mainly travel expenditure. And we can already guess that in 2020 this will look quite a bit different. And then another big expense that we have is on staff and contractors, the staff and contractors that Lydia introduced you to earlier in the board report. And this number has definitely grown in 2020 as we've hired some new contractors. David, that's yours. Should be mine. No, I think so. So yeah, let's make quickly. So this budget plan has been weird for 2020 with all the changes that current circumstances forced upon us, but we're together to make it happen and make an educated calculation of all the risk and things we can do. Our financial strategy follows the path set in the previous year, aiming at enabling our community to spend in key areas to cultivate our growth and support key initiatives to adapt to all the COVID-19 measures we had to wait until we had a good overview of the situation. Taking in mind that travel costs were reduced, we decided to shift costs to other expenses like our contractors in order to support our community without holding back on spending, which we need to do, as I already mentioned. And we also revised the event budgets and considered how we could spend on the huge amount of infrastructure. And with that, I pass it on to Mike. So 2020 definitely has been interesting so far, but the main takeaway is that it's actually been relatively non-scary for us. So going into the crisis, we definitely had some worries about the work that's being done with the COVID-19 measures that we're doing on the staff and the staff, given that they have a lot of information from the staff and they're very solid. I mean, in the case of 2020, it's still very important and very solid. So I think we should all be very careful with that. Okay. So just to take over that, as you can read on the slides, we have got some new people. We know the travel expansion is going to come back. We've got plenty of money we can look at to spend on more coordinators in the future. So I'll just sort of cover that until I go back and I can probably move on. Sure. If there are any questions, we can quickly answer. Okay, let's move on. There is one question in the shared notes. Where would you like to spend more money to get rid of all the money? I don't think we have time for questions. We will take them afterwards in the chat. Fundraising working group, Kenny Coyle. Hello, can you hear me okay? Awesome. So do I have superpowers to move next? Excellent. So I'm standing in for the Fundraising Working Group. So you've probably heard the previous reports talk about us, but we look after the infrastructure involved or at least we take care of the infrastructure that's involved and trying to bring money in through the fundraising campaigns and we also try to help organize and run these campaigns when appropriate. I'm going to be relatively quick through these slides. So that we can try and make some of the time back. In the last year, we had a few members leave the working group just due to all the commitments. So at the start of this year since the last Academy, we've had three active members myself, Liz and Scarlett. It's a lot of help for my Liz as well. But luckily we've had some new members and the near term joint of Karl and Nate. Again, thanks for joining and giving us all this help. Over the last year, actually we're not going to be that active in terms of running fundraising campaigns, but that as you can see based on the last session is because we don't really need to be doing much fundraising at this point. But at the same time, we're using the resources that we have just now to get us ready for the day when we need to. Just now we're not really happy with our infrastructure and we want to spend this time strategically to make the infrastructure better. The last year has been a little bit difficult around it and that's the main constraints that we've been having. We're also working with EV to sign an NDA because we are dealing with money and often private information of people who are donating money. So yeah, a couple of lessons learned. I got some new members and a couple of members were otherwise engaged, so they decided to go into some other things. But we've also improved how we communicate with our internal telegram chat and a few other things. I realize based on one of the questions here, I didn't answer one of the questions right away. We are the fundraising working group, not the financial working group. So we tried to feed into the financial working group. So we're really helped. We're still working on our CIVACRM problems as Alicia alluded to earlier. If anyone in the community has experience with CIVACRM or development of systems that take payments, or know of anyone who you can help join the community, we'd be very grateful. And once we get our technology and order experience and actually running the fundraising campaigns, how the marketing works, how the data capture works, and things like that. So Kegels would actually side the A with the board. So the working group can deal with the private information of our donors. We want to try and improve our communication internally. We'll try and increase the cadence of that and make sure that everyone in the working group knows what's going on and can jump in when we're able to. But more importantly, we want to fix our fundraising platform. Currently CIVACRM, we want to work with a new contractor, and we want to get that in order this year. And as it was a side effect of that, the real thing we're trying to do here is improve the user experience of our donors and make it easier for people to actually make money when they want to. And we know that we've got a few years of being relatively comfortable, but we don't want to be comfortable around making sure that this is ready for when we need it. So yeah, if you want to come speak to us, you can email us on KDEV campaign, or you can reach out to anyone of us directly, and we can start a conversation. Thanks folks. Are you ready? We can't hear you yet, unfortunately. Since we are very short on time, maybe Olaf can continue with the next one. Can you hear me now? Yes. Okay, so we look up to the infrastructure, and it has a really giant amount of data we are serving. And you can see the numbers there. We have four members, and we also have some members who look after some very specific servers, but they are not part of the coding. And yes, we are looking for more people to try and submit them. Our major task, which we worked on this year, was migration to GitLab. Like 75% of our time to migrate to GitLab, I guess we work with the GitLab company to move several features which were required to community addition, just like free and open source. Addition, which we are using on our instance, and we also rewrote several parts of our infrastructure. So we also introduce some new services because these tools were required for moving to GitLab, like identity seek mechanism, which basically seems to have various user profile data and developer group membership, as well as board group membership. We also introduced the string repository mirroring, which we now use to mirror all of the queue on the invent.git.org. We also consolidated the private repositories. So we had some private repositories for sysadmin stuff. Those are now on the GitLab. And also we cleaned up lots of things as part of migration to GitLab. So other work we did was we changed our domain registrar from code editor to name chip. One of the main reason was that code editor support for DNS thread was not so much proper, and we were pretty much forced to switch provider. We also switched our service provider from Python to Cloud NS for DNS resolution. And as I mentioned earlier, we also rolled out support for DNS set. So we had our users only get the authenticated responses from us. We also changed providers from Incapsular to Cloudflare because Incapsular stopped sponsoring us, so we had to find a cloudflare. So we had to migrate to Cloudflare for web application firewall services. And other minor works we complicated was introducing our activity filter, which allows you to select two commits, most required community tasks and box work, private projects or products. And we also updated several of our workloads for the CI system. And that allows us to have additional resources and like go through all of the very few faster. And we also introduced the pickpocket button that was mostly worked on by academic team, but it is now part of our infrastructure. So that can be used now for operation of sprints, conferences, and all those events. So where we need help, so most of the items which are on our to-do and they are on the next slide. So we need to move our CI services to KLAB and retire the Jenkins. We need to rework the epi.coini.org because that is the one of the really old age and really ugly age part of our infrastructure and we need to get rid of it. We also need to replace, we need to also allow the replacement for KDE identity, not as the migrate. That is worked by KDE web team. And also we need to replace mirror-brain because Google changed some policies so you cannot serve the EXE like in Microsoft Windows executables over HTTP. And also we need to migrate our server to New York. Yes, there was a last slide anyway. And yeah. So thank you. So since we need to move on with the conference, we've been discussing that we will, the two working group reports that are missing, which are the KDE Free Kids Foundation and the community working group. We will move them after the rest of the academy sessions are done for today. So we don't push all of the rooms later. So this was the first part of the working group talks and thank you all for who spoke and see you later. Okay. So the KDE Free Kids Foundation during the last year has been a bit of a busy year. Generally for those who don't know what the KDE Free Kids Foundation is, it is a foundation with a legal agreement with a Qt company to ensure that Qt stays open source. The purpose as defined in the statutes is securing the availability of the Qt toolkit for the development of free software and in particular for the development of KDE software. There's been a talk earlier today with Cornelius about the history of it. So I'll just briefly say that the history goes back to trautech times and very, very early KDE times. Now, during the last years, we have been negotiating with the Qt company about updating the agreement that we have with them. The idea being that we don't want to change anything in their relationship much. We want to continue protecting Qt as an open source library. But of course, if we can make it easier for the company to sell Qt licenses without harming the open source side of Qt, then this is something worthwhile to try. Other things are just making the contracts more modern, adapting to changes. For example, at the moment, it assumes that a Linux desktop Linux is using X11 and eventually we want to move to Wayland there. But there, we would need to be careful because Wayland is also used in the embedded Qt products. So yeah, we need to have a bit of thought how to tackle that. The status there is that the negotiations which have been ongoing for about three years now have been delayed by a number of U-turns from the company. Especially during the last year, we have repeatedly resisted pressure to accept far-ranging changes on short notice. And at the moment, we are mainly waiting for a signal from the Qt company how they want to continue with those talks. Because for us, the contract has written this very well. But if they are interested in making it easier to sell licenses, then we are ready to talk. But as I said, we need a signal from the Qt company how they want to go after a number of U-turns there. So our motivation for the future is unchanged. First of all, we want solutions that are good for all stakeholders, that are good for KDE, for the Qt company, for Qt contributors, for Qt users. We want to protect open source Qt and we want to help keep the ecosystem of both the Qt businesses and Qt contributors healthy. The second activity in 2019-2020 was resolving contradictions between various legal terms. Specifically, the Qt terms of use for the paid Qt licenses were stating that Qt customers are not allowed to use libraries based on open source Qt. So there was a bit of a contradiction between the LGPL and those paid license terms. We asked about that in October 2019 and we suggested some changes and by July 2020, the biggest problems have been resolved. So Qt customers are now allowed to use KDE frameworks. There is still a problem, which is that terms still say that open source libraries based on open source Qt can only be used if there is no relation between the Qt licensee and the developers of the library. The idea is that they don't want people to just open source something internal stuff to get around paying licenses, but of course that also means that contributions to LGPL licensed Qt-based libraries are currently not and in many cases not allowed. We believe it's in the best interest of the Qt company to actually fully resolve this and we are in continuing talks with them about that. Qt itself incorporates products based on open source Qt. For example, Qt web engine is based on a KHTML derivative. But it's still the case that the second topic is not actually related to the legal agreement we have with the Qt company. So I'm open to discussion from the KDE community on whether how much we should actually continue to pursue this topic. It is in the scope of the stated foundation purpose, which is to keep Qt available as free software. And I believe that you're now limiting the usefulness of open source Qt is definitely within that purpose, but it's not the direct purpose, which is really about open source releases of Qt. So you can post comments and questions of course here in the chat, but also on the public KDE community at KDE.org mailing list or at the non-public KDE general assembly on Monday, the 7th of September, which is also when we will decide who will actually represent KDE at the KDE FreeQ Foundation in the next year. Martin Kroner and myself are running again, but of course there could be other people stepping out. So yeah, that's it from me. I'll just have a brief look at the notes, whether there is already questions or yeah. Regarding the Qt terms, LGPL, do you understand it correctly that a commercial Qt customer is now finally officially allowed to use KDE frameworks but not allowed to contribute back? Yes, to the first, Qt customers are officially allowed to use KDE frameworks because KDE frameworks have been distributed by the Qt company on the Qt Marketplace and everything that has been distributed by the Qt company on the Qt Marketplace is wide listed. KDE products which have not been distributed on the Marketplace, then it depends because if the company using it has contributed to it, then a close reading of it would say that they are not allowed to use it, but for everything that the Qt company has released on the Marketplace, it says clearly that they are allowed to contribute. So for KDE, it's still not a full solution, but it's a kind of 90% solution also. Should I read the questions? That would be nice. The second question is, so in say 2019, before this discussion, KDE couldn't be used at all with paid Qt. Kind of a similar question. When we asked about that in October, the Qt company told us that actually this wording came from Trollcheck Times, I don't know, I discovered that in October 2019. And I know that the Qt, I've heard of no cases where the Qt company actually enforced that and told customers that they are not allowed to use it. They became aware of it in 2019. And I know that it took many, many months to resolve that. So the original feedback from the Qt company was, oh, you know, that's the wording is just, there was actually something that has always been historically there. We're not really interested in that, but we had a very, very long discussions about that, how to change that and whether to change it, et cetera, afterwards. And we're now 90% there. So for me, I had more of the impression that it was actually more of a current problem than a historical problem. But anyway, I mean, it's 90% resolved now, but not 100%. Nice. Third question, while certainly a fork would be undesirable, have there been preparations made to go in that direction if necessary? I'm not the person to ask about that, because the KDE Free Qt Foundation is not in the business of forking Qt. I know of Qt stakeholders who have said that if it's necessary to fork Qt, they would do that. And they would also support Qt from a business point of view. But the purpose of the KDE Free Qt Foundation is really to avoid a fork, because at the moment, Qt can be used both by companies who wish to develop closed source software and by free software users. And that works by having this dual licensing approach. And this dual licensing approach means that if people contribute to Qt, they sign a contribution license agreement to the Qt company. And the KDE Free Qt Foundation is a bit of the other side of it, saying that if people license their contributions, they can be sure that the Qt company will not suddenly take it closed source or so. Now, of course, the contract, there are areas on the contract where the Qt company could do things which KDE would not like. For example, the agreement kicks in if there something has not been released for a year. So theoretically, the Qt company could actually just delay all open source releases of Qt by a year. But doing so would, of course, completely destroy the Qt project. So I think the Qt company would wish to be subtle to actually do that. But anyway, I mean, if people inside the Qt company were to decide to go that route, then the community would fork Qt. Or now, no, it's not the community that would fork Qt. If the Qt company decided to fork Qt away from Qt project, then Qt project would continue. Because at the moment, we have one Qt. If the Qt company says we have two versions of Qt, one for the paying customers and the other for the community, then the community would not say, okay, we will just delay all security fixes by one year. They wouldn't do that. I think we should wrap up. We have used our 10 minutes and move on to the last presentation. Olaf, you're, I hope, also round so that people can ask more questions. I think it's super important that we talk about the KDE Free Qt Foundation. It's always such a mouthful. Thank you so much for all the hard work. Thomas, are you on the line already? I am. All right. I think it should be there, I hope. Yeah, we can hear you and videos coming. Welcome. Yes, community working group. Thank you for stepping in and presenting. Hi. I am the presenter for the community working group. Let's see how these slides are. Yay, community working group. We are the people that try to make KDE community sane and not fighting with each other and behaving and respecting and trying to make KDE a good place for good people trying to work. As we know, free software developers are crazy people that works for free even though they probably have better things to do like live in a life. For us to do this, for us to continue working for free and for pleasure, we need to have a safe environment for everybody. So we should not allow fighting to happen inside of the community and we are the ones to talk when something starts to happen or is happening. Past year, not a lot of things happen and this is really, really good because two or three years ago we were working every single week trying to fix something. But we had some common issues. Specifically, when fabricators started to be changing to GitLab, we really did not know what to expect. People coming from the GitHub side of things, people coming from open source software, from universities, they were lost. We actually received quite a lot of emails that were not for the community working group. But because we have the community in the name of the email, we received help requests for helping the students trying to start with KDE developments. Valori did a really good work on that, showing people the correct way. I did not do a really great job on that because usually I tend to jump when fighting is already there. We had some troubles on the Planet KDE blog. We actually had to cut permissions of the big Planet KDE for one developer that was misusing in a not really good way. Another thing that we had is the tooling because GitLab also provides place for you to do bug reports. But we do have fabricator that receives tasks and have the Zilla that also receives bug reports. People coming from GitHub, they don't really know that we have fabricator in Bugzilla. They try to only use our GitLab instance. I know that we should but people are using it. So we need to find a way to fix those things in the future because those things are escalating. Sometimes somebody does not know what to do and then people complain about the community working group that somebody is using the tools as they are not supposed to. The problem is that newcomers don't know that. We actually reduced a lot of things because of GitLab because now it is easier to work as people are using Git and GitHub. GitLab is mostly, unfortunately, something that really resembles GitHub. This helps. But it does not only help because it broke how old developers tend to work. I know, for instance, that quite a few of them are not really happy with that. I am talking to them and trying to make them see that, well, not all of the changes are really good for one person but they are good for the overall community. We are right now with a few channels on Telegram because Telegram, apparently, is not the most used because we have Telegram, we have IRC and we have Signal currently. But on Telegram is the place that I am receiving most of the community working group requests. So I created a little Telegram hotline there. It is helping quite a lot because I can quickly jump on it and talk to them specifically because I don't really sleep. So my mornings and my nights are talking with people. And the cooperation between the CWG and the board increased quite a lot and this is really good because it makes it much, much easier to handle problems. When needed, I am having face-to-face meetings with people when problems arise. For next year, I plan to increase the documentation and best practices so newcomers will know what to do and, of course, ensure that communication is done in an effective and proper manner with everybody. Old people, new people within KDE, we need to have the same mutual respect. KDE is not a place where respect is there and it's people starting on KDE should already have the same kind of respects than an old developer and I am trying to make this more and more clear. When I say I am not talking about Meet Thomas, I am talking about the whole CWG. You can talk to us Meet Thomas Valori and Lidia on community.org. I know that this is a small presentation but because of the kind of work that we do on the CWG, I cannot go into further details. So if you guys have any questions, please, I'm open.