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

List:       kde-community
Subject:    Re: Proposal unify back our release schedules
From:       Sune Vuorela <nospam () vuorela ! dk>
Date:       2024-04-19 12:26:45
Message-ID: uvtnu5$99v$1 () ciao ! gmane ! io
[Download RAW message or body]

On 2024-04-19, Carl Schwan <carl@carlschwan.eu> wrote:
> Hello Community,
>
> I know this might be a controversial idea, but I would like to propose reunify
> our release schedules. I feel like splitting our releases schedules between
> Frameworks, Plasma and Gear is not working as well as we intended it to be when
> we split the releases schedules for Plasma 5. This is for multiple reasons:
>
> * We end up with 3 different products which are released at different times but
>   are connected together. Apps and Plasma both need Framework, Plasma needs some
>   packages from gear like kio-extra, Gear needs some package from Plasma like
>   Breeze. Coordinating all these inter-groups dependencies is complex and was one
>   the reason we had to do a megarelease for Plasma 6. Also for the end user, one
>   product is a lot easier to understand.

It might make sense for plasma and gear to follow the same schedule. But
I really like what we have going with frameworks.

One issue that leads to the 'frameworks stable, release monthly' was
that sometimes, even often, you need to add a *feature* to a framework
to address a *bug* in an application.

If you can't relatively quickly start requiring the fixed framework, you
end up working around it in the application and forget fixing it in the
framework.

I do think that that has been a great success with the frameworks
release schedule.

I don't think we should move away from that.

/Sune

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