The releases after 2.0 and string changes..

[Mark Kretschmann]

On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 3:12 PM, Dan Meltzer
<parallelgrapefruit at gmail.com> wrote:
> It seems clear to me that we have a lot of string tweaking to do after 2.0.
> I don't think it's fair however to expect translators to keep up with a 1-2
> week release cycle for our first point releases.  I'm not exactly sure the
> best way we can handle this..
>
> I'm wondering if we should immediately branch 2.0, keep it string frozen,
> and just do bug fixes in it while starting 2.1 development in trunk and
> planning a 2-3 month development cycle for it (short enough so that the
> missing strings are not missing forever, long enough to still allow for
> features).  I think this would be acceptable as many of the 2.1 features we
> have talked about are already implemented and sitting in developers git
> branches, allowing a whole bunch of changes to land post 2.0.  I think this
> would also allow us to keep 2.0.x fairly stable (as we all want to get our
> new features in after 2.0 is released, but I don't know if it makes sense to
> put all these features in 2.0.x)
>
> The downside to this is that we probably will stop using 2.0.* on a
> day-to-day basis, and would have to have two checkouts in order to make
> bugfixes (though you can set up git to have branches that point to different
> places in svn, which would reduce the amount of different checkouting.)
>
> Thoughts?

The plan that I, Nikolaj, and a few others had discussed on IRC was to
keep 2.0 as trunk for about 3 weeks after release, so that we can all
focus entirely on bug fixing. If we branch immediately, we'd be forced
to backport, and that never works out very well in reality.

We would then do a 2.0.1 and maybe 2.0.2 release from trunk, and after
that branch.

-- 
Mark Kretschmann
Amarok Developer
www.kde.org - amarok.kde.org