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

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: What happens after 2.1 ?
From:       Lars Knoll <lars () trolltech ! com>
Date:       2001-02-22 11:33:25
[Download RAW message or body]

On Wednesday 21 February 2001 20:33, Waldo Bastian wrote:
> On Wednesday 21 February 2001 07:15, Bernhard Rosenkraenzer wrote:
> > On Wed, 21 Feb 2001, David Faure wrote:
> > > Ok, so 2.1 is almost done, now is the time to wonder about what we do
> > > after 2.1 :-)
> > >
> > > It seems to be already agreed that there will be a 2.1.1, with more
> > > documentation, translations and critical bugfixes.
> > >
> > > But the question is:
> > > Do most developers have new apps or features to commit, that would
> > > involve much new documentation and translations, OR do most developers
> > > would rather keep bugfixing what's in 2.1 and get it released in 2.1.1
> > > ?
> >
> > The other question is, what will be the next release after 2.1.1? Will we
> > have a 2.2 (much the same thing as 2.1 is to 2.0 - fixes and extra
> > features, same API, ...), or go for 3.0 right away (on a side note, any
> > ideas when Qt 3.0 will be released, since we'll probably want to use
> > that for KDE 3.0?)?
>
> 2.2 I don't see a strong need for either Qt 3.0 or KDE 3.0. Especially with
> the rich text widget backported to Qt 2.2 I think we should continue the
> KDE 2.x series for a while.

There is one strong reason for using Qt-3 as soon as it's ready. Support for 
arabic and hebrew in KDE. This is something we won't get without using Qt-3, 
and could be a point where we get significantly ahead of competition (if the 
move to Gtk-2 goes as slow as it currently seems). As a sideeffect all the 
current charset mess will fall away and make it much easier for developers to 
write apps that really work with eg. asian languages.

My proposal would be to continue towards 2.2 which would probably come out at 
the same time Qt-3 goes final, and then move to Qt-3 as fast as possible. 
Maybe we can actually get KDE compiled against Qt-3 with a few #ifdefs. Qt-3 
is mostly source compatible to Qt-2.

Cheers,
Lars

>
> We want to have a smooth/fast migration from 2.x to 3.0. and then 3.0
> should have stronger BC as 2.x. For that to work there must be a stable
> release of Qt 3.x and a stable gcc 3.0 compiler. We don't want to end up in
> a situation where we need to delay our release because we are waiting for
> either of those two to become stable. Since the KDE 2.x platform is good
> enough to last a while I think we can afford to wait for those to be
> released and stabilized a bit.
>
> > I'd rather avoid having 3 branches (2_1_1, 2_2, 3_0) open at the same
> > time (syncing fixes between all of them would be painful).
> >
> > IMO:
> > if(next_bigger_release==2.2)
> > 	CVS->branch();
>
> Yes, I agree with that. I think 2.1 shows that the "release early and
> often" strategy that we are following is working well. For 2.2 I would use
> the same schedule as we did for 2.1.
>
> So e.g. 2.1.1 in one month from now. 2.2beta1 slightly after that (April
> 1?).
>
> Cheers,
> Waldo

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