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

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: Next release called 1.2? We're not getting anywhere!
From:       Torsten Rahn <rahn () astrophysik ! uni-kiel ! de>
Date:       1999-08-25 12:32:39
[Download RAW message or body]

> 
> > Matthias Hoelzer-Kluepfel is in charge of the release. He decides when
> > we release, what we release and how it is named.
> 
> We already decided on the name IIRC: "Kopernicus". The version number
> is in question, though by a small minority only. The vast majority
> seems in favour of 1.2.

Sorry, but you're plain wrong here.

1. The *Code-name* of KDE 1.whatevermhkdecides was meant to be 'Kolor'.
   Codenames are made to get a dummy-name until the release-name has 
   been decided. 'Kopernikus' is the *Codename* for the next
   major-release which will be  -- very probably -- named KDE 2.0
  
2. KDE is *no* total democracy. It is not developed by voting. If we
   would develop apps by voting we would end up in a total mess. 
   You don't believe that? Well look at 

   http://oehlux.uibk.ac.at/kde/wishlist/votingresult.php3

   If KDE was developed by voting we would end up e.g. in 

   - using GTK instead of QT
   - emulating Windows
   - being a perfect Windows-clone with Macintosh-theme as default
     theme
   
   Of course nobody of the KDE-core-developers would be encouraged
   to program using GTK nor would we want to create a Windows-clone
   that's why it doesn't work this way.
   Core-Developers do only things that they really want to do.
   They aren't the slaves of their apps-wishing users.   
   That's why it mostly works *this* way in Open-Source-projects:
   all big projects are divided up into subprojects who are lead
   by a coordinator/maintainer. Somebody has to lead the dance -- 
   in most cases it's the one who has most experience or the one
   who has begun the work on the (sub-)project Therefore he is 
   accepted by people to be the leader. 
   The majority discusses topics but he draws the final 
   conlcusions and makes important/official decisions.
   Of course the coordinator should make his decisions based on 
   the discussions that are made -- especially if they 
   are essential for the future of the project. But of course he 
   is free to decide something else than the majority of the people. 
   Of course he risks thereby that his leadership won't be accepted 
   by the majority anymore. 
   But at least concerning such ridiculous things like version-numbers
   people *should* accept his decisions as the majority risks that 
   the very worthy coordinator quits disencouraged his difficult job.
   
   IIRC it has always been the 'release-dude'/the packager who makes
   the decision concerning the version-number. He manages the release,
   makes sure that everything goes right and finally labels the 
   release. Matthias Hoelzer-Kluepfel has done an excellent job 
   in being the 'release-dude' so it's his decision if 'Kolor' will 
   be named something else than KDE 1.1.2.

   Torsten Rahn

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