<html><head></head><body><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">"Àlex Fiestas" <afiestas@kde.org> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<pre class="k9mail">On Wednesday 10 July 2013 13:22:20 Sune Vuorela wrote:<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;">On 2013-07-09, Sune Vuorela <nospam@vuorela.dk> wrote:<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;">So. first one.</blockquote><br />Second one<br /><br />Release frequency.<br /><br />We have a giant quality problem. Distros won't ship a .0 release to real<br />users (as opposed to testers/power users) and wait until there has been<br />a couple of bug fix releases. Until we ensure that our .0 releases are<br />usable I don't see how we can cut down on that.<br /><br />Some distros release in a 6 month cycle. Others in a 8. and ones even in<br />longer cycles. Going for anything shorter than 6 months will ensure that<br />distros are going to skip releases. why work with releases that they<br />aren't
going to ship to users anyways?<br /></blockquote>Not by distributions working that way I guess.<br /><br />Part of the reasons why I want this release schedule is exactly for these <br />distros. Let me explain.<br /><br />Right now distributions pick the release they see fit and make a distro with <br />it. It might be .0, .2 or .5.<br /><br />If a distribution in their right decide to pick a .5 release wile a .0 is <br />already out there (this already happened), what is happening here is that a <br />HUGE release with a LOT of changes won't even get to the users of that <br />distribution at least for another distribution cycle. This usually happens <br />with distributions that have a release cycle of 9 months.<br /><br />With having releases every 3 months we make the amount of features smaller and <br />more often so distributions will always be able to pick a more updated release <br />than with the current situation.<br /><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:
0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;">And given there need to be some stabilization and integration work, I'm<br />sure skipping releases would be the default for most distros. Hopefully<br />distros can coordinate and at least skip the same. Mostly leading to the<br />other releases being useless because they only reach very few users.<br /></blockquote>This is already happening, no change here.<br /><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;">And as it currently is, we need the .4 and .5 releases.<br /></blockquote>and .6 and .7 and .8 and .9, we could have a 4.0.200, there is always need of <br />bugfixing releases, question is how many of these point releases are pending <br />of upstream KDE and not downstream distros.<br /><br />To make it clear, I WANT to have .4 and .5 releases, just not made by upstream <br />developers.<br /><br /></pre></blockquote></div><br>
-- <br>
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.</body></html>