On Monday 06 May 2002 03:55 pm, Guillaume Laurent wrote:
> On Monday 06 May 2002 22:47, Waldo Bastian wrote:
> > I support that. I am not opposed to the idea of releasing KDE 3.1 as ju=
st
> > kdelibs and kdebase and all the other packages could be released
> > independently (ether as one big packages or on an app by app basis) and
> > possibly on different schedules.
>
> Gnome is more or less following this principle (e.g. a Gnome "release" is
> actually a snapshot of all apps at a given point). It's a freakin' mess.
> The big problem is that there's no incentive for maintainers to stabilise
> their apps at some common point.=20

We had that common point with KDE 3.0 but I don't see why everything should=
 be=20
released at a common point for further releases. The only point of concern=
=20
would be, as David already mentioned, that released applications don't depe=
nd=20
on unreleased changes in e.g. kdelibs.

Cheers,
Waldo
=2D-=20
bastian@kde.org  |   SuSE Labs KDE Developer  |  bastian@suse.com