Lessons for PA3

[Sebastian Kügler]

On Friday, December 16, 2011 12:08:48 Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
>   On Friday, December 16, 2011 11:57:05 Sebastian
> wrote:
> > * Longer cycle
> > * Longer freeze
> 
> agered on all points. i think it was useful to get a PA2 out there quickly
> to  polish PA1 paint points and show momentum and progress.
> congratulations and thanks to everyone who was involved in making that
> happen.
> 
> now, we can afford to, and need to for the reasons you outlined, catch our 
> breath and move forward.

Yes, it wasn't easy, but a good thing to do, as you note, and I'm happy we did 
it. :)

> > * Clearer "what do we ship"
> >
> > There has been quite a bit of patch juggling in the last days before the
> > release, and to me it was hard to find out what exactly to ship. We need
> > to get this more clearly defined, and have some time between code-freeze
> > and release to make sure everything works.
> 
> goal #1 should be to limit the number of patches we ship. obviously with
> PA2  we were in the difficult situation of being very close to a kdelibs
> and kde- workspace release (4.8) that we really wanted/needed
> functionality from.
> 
> so for PA3, let's ensure that everything possible is in the most recent
> stable  release of KDE SC. that may mean timing PA3 to sync with KDE SC
> 4.9, which may be a good idea for the longer release cycle you issues you
> also mentioned.

That's my thinking as well. If the next cycle is exactly 6 months, we'll end 
up in the same situation as we did now. (And let's face it, not being able to 
rely on vanilla kdelibs, runtime, workspace, etc. really causes a lot of extra 
work, last-minute quality issues and icky feelings.)

I'd love to see PA3 (probably even PA2) building against vanilla KDE SC 
packages, and I agree on that goal.
-- 
sebas

http://www.kde.org | http://vizZzion.org | GPG Key ID: 9119 0EF9