[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: KDE Development Policy
From:       Matthias Welwarsky <matze () stud ! fbi ! fh-darmstadt ! de>
Date:       2002-03-09 15:33:20
[Download RAW message or body]

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



[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]