From kde-core-devel Sat Mar 09 15:33:20 2002 From: Matthias Welwarsky Date: Sat, 09 Mar 2002 15:33:20 +0000 To: kde-core-devel Subject: Re: KDE Development Policy X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel&m=101568819229604 Dirk Mueller wrote: > On Fre, 08 M=E4r 2002, Neil Stevens wrote: > > > 2) Rampant compile problems > > Like ? > > Indeed there are problems on non-gcc platforms, which made us require > updating the admin directory to a newer libtool version. However, thats= your > point 3 already. > > > 3) Last-minute changes to build requirements that cannot be met by > > many developers without an operating system upgrade (2) > > Sorry? > > Let me put the facts straight: > [ technical discussion on how the libtool upgrade was necessary deleted ]= Dirk, you have your point here, and nobody doubts that the step was neces= sary. The failure is that you did not step into the way of Michael Matz and Ste= phan Kulow and allowed the patch to go in without warning, despite the fact th= at it affected _all_ developers, not just the "core" people. The patch should h= ave been circulated a week or two in advance, and annoucements should have be= en made other than a mail to kde-core-devel which has a very limited audienc= e. So people were hit by surprise, and of course they blame you. > > > The credibility of the release policies are further damaged by the > > manner in which the decisions are made. For instance, the major > > change to libtool, there was a minimum of discussion, with no > > compelling bugs or reasons shown for making this drastic change. > > There were always major changes in the build system before a release > to overcome certain platform incompatibilities. > This is no excuse at all. It was bad then, and it is bad now. But develop= ers will accept even late change if you give them time to make themselves fam= iliar with it. And all it takes is a proper annoucement with some sentences abo= ut the reason. The whole "discussion" as you call it, took place on kde-core-dev= el within 3 (!) mails: The announcement from Michael Matz, then one mail fro= m Andy Fawcett who *doubted* that it was the proper time to change a core compon= ent of the build system right now, and one mail from Stephan Kulow who gave a technical reason why the change was needed. That was last Thursday! How many people, do you think, actually read this mail? How many realized= that this libtool patch will break their build system? The original announceme= nt did not contain the slightest hint that it would break the current build syst= em. Man, what did you think would happen? I had a discussion with WildFox on #kde, and what struck me badly is that= nobody seemed to realize how many people a change like this would affect = - nearly everybody who develops for KDE and has a CVS account. And these pe= ople are not always top skill developers who are used to upgrade every single component of their system by hand. Forcing such a change on them is just blatantly ignorant. Did you think about the translators or the documentat= ion writers? Will the change affect them, too? Will they be able to handle th= e situation? Coordinating a project like KDE is not just about technical stuff, I'm af= raid. If you, as the release coordinator, are not the one to lead the project, = then this is a person that needs to be found very quickly. regards, Matze -- Matthias Welwarsky Fachschaft Informatik FH Darmstadt Email: matze@stud.fbi.fh-darmstadt.de "I bet the human brain is a kludge." -- Marvin Minsky