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

List:       owncloud
Subject:    Re: [owncloud-user] ownCloud Client Version 2.2.2 Released
From:       Klaas Freitag <freitag () owncloud ! com>
Date:       2016-07-04 13:08:40
Message-ID: 577A5FD8.5060409 () owncloud ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 30.06.2016 00:55, Sandro Knau=DF wrote:
Hi Sandro,

>> But maybe, next time we screw, drop a short note please. Danimo has
>> enabled the updater for 2.2.2 - happy updating :-)
>
> And keep in mind, there are also distribution that build the ooc for their
> users - If you think that version are screwed up, than this is a very
> interesting information for distribution. Normally you guys complain ditr=
os to
> be "slow" in making the release ready for the users. But yourself do not =
trust
> the released version and wait also some time before giving it to everybod=
y.

It is not a question of "trust" and intention and all these big words. =

We just saw that 2.2.0 and unfortunately 2.2.1 were troublesome, and =

held them back. It was not a super critical problem, nor something we =

could not have talked about. Most people did not even realize.

Needless to say that this was a huge pitty.

> With the information in this thread I see that the attitude to try to bui=
ld
> the new version as fast as possible will maybe result in bad user experie=
nce -
> So I really should change the packaging process for debian and wait some =
weeks
> after release date before even think about starting packaging to be sure,=
 that
> the version is not screwed up. Is that what you want?
No, absolutely not. We are working hard to make every release very good =

from day one. The incident I was talking about before was an exception =

and not something we calculate or even accept.

> Okay the text is polemic I know - but I really think, that hiding the
> information that a version is screwed up is not a good idea, because this=
 will
> trigger problems downstream. F.ex. I have packaged 2.2.0 and 2.2.1 for de=
bian
> already, but not 2.2.2 because form the changelog it sounds like "okay so=
me
> bugs are closed" -> will do the packaging, when I have time for. With the
> information at this thread I now know, okay I should package 2.2.2 faster,
> because 2.2.0 and 2.2.1 are screwed up. ( Or better wait for 2.2.3 ?)...

It was not that the information was hid. There was no intention behind =

not telling. It was a fail of certain people (lets say me), happening in =

the hardest time of the project so far. And please remember that we =

talk about enabling of the auto updater here, which is disabled in =

Debian anyway, right?

The version was not so bad that we had to pull it or such. Please do not =

overdo it.

But what does all this tell us: We need to communicate all this. Ok, I =

apologize again for not doing it.

But honestly, our biggest problem that is the root of this is that the =

pre-releases (betas and RCs) are only rarely tested in the community. I =

would be happy to learn why not. If that remains that way, that will =

probably force us to a different release procedure, which I would find =

confusing.

regards,

Klaas


_______________________________________________
User mailing list
User@owncloud.org
http://mailman.owncloud.org/mailman/listinfo/user
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]