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

List:       kde-release-team
Subject:    Re: Fwd: KDE Frameworks Release Cycle
From:       Scott Kitterman <kde () kitterman ! com>
Date:       2014-04-30 9:24:55
Message-ID: a319536e-1f09-4085-92d6-1a28cf086589 () email ! android ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On April 30, 2014 3:32:02 AM EDT, Mario Fux <kde-ml@unormal.org> wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 30. April 2014, 04.20:21 schrieb Lisandro Damián Nicanor
> Pérez 
> Meyer:
> 
> Morning
> 
> > > > For Ubuntu I can use the Firefox example. So can you explain why
> is KF5
> > > > different than firefox?
> > > 
> > > Firefox (and Chromium too) are handled like no other packages in
> the
> > > archive.  It's the best known (to average computer users) FOSS
> brand.
> > > There's not much choice but to ship it and given the combination of
> > > library bundling and the presence of security fixes in essentially
> every
> > > release there's no realistic choice but to eat releases whole
> (despite
> > > viewing the necessity as being highly distasteful).  Canonical has
> also
> > > funded significant engineering resources to maintain Ubuntu Firefox
> > > packages and do extensive regression testing.
> > > 
> > > None of the above is relevant to KF5.
> > > 
> > > If I were to ask for the kind of update policy Ubuntu has for
> Firefox, I
> > > am pretty sure it would get laughed out of the room.  I've gotten
> > > exceptions approved for quite a number of packages, so I think I
> have a
> > > reasonable basis to form an opinion on what's likely to be
> approved.
> > > 
> > > The KF5 plan amounts to "Non-rolling distros: you're on your own."
> > 
> > Debian will be in the exact same position. Firefox and Chromium are
> just
> > good examples of what to do to get your downstream unhappy and get
> your
> > users non- stable experiences.
> > 
> > The result will be that we will need to freeze at some point and do
> our
> > best to keep up with patches for stable releases. Or maybe even drop
> KF5
> > for stable releases :-/
> > 
> > I don't know how other major distros with focus in stability work,
> but I
> > think they will be more or less in the same position (I'm thinking in
> Red
> > Hat, Centos, Suse and others here, but I might be wrong).
> 
> I might be to naive but what about something like an LTS for KF5. A
> branch 
> where all the distros and some KF5 hackers backports fixes and promise
> to do 
> this for 1, 2 or more years? I even think that other people and groups
> could 
> be interested in this as e.g. Calligra who seems historically to be
> more 
> conservative about kdelibs/KF5 minimum requirements...
> 
> I see Kevin's arguments and the ones of the distros. So maybe finding a
> middle 
> ground?

Since we release on a different schedule, with monthly KF5 releases, we'd all be \
interested in supporting different releases. 

I don't know what the Plasma release schedule/plan is.  Perhaps if they're on a \
longer cycle and can declare up front what KF5 version they are targeting, we could \
all aim at that? 

Scott K


_______________________________________________
release-team mailing list
release-team@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team


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