2.1.0 release plan proposal

[Lydia Pintscher]

On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 15:41, Orville Bennett <illogical1 at gmail.com> wrote:
> So you're going to have packagers do the job that developers are
> supposed to do?
> I'd say good luck with that but I really hope it fails miserably. If
> no one cares about 2.0.x such is life. It's quite tacky, not to
> mention irresponsible, to go sending off patches to packagers because
> it was too "hard" to get the people who should be doing it to do it.

No my point was that if we say get two or three patches backported
(looking at 2.0.2 we get five maximum) it is hardly worth the hassle
doing a release. It costs me and everyone who helps me quite a lot of
time.

> If one patch qualifies as important, then it's important enough for a
> 2.0.3. What about those who don't join the (super secret might I add)
> amarok-packagers list? They, and by proxy our users through them,
> should miss out on this (admittedly) important patch(es) because we
> were too lazy?

I am pretty sure we have every distro we know of that packages Amarok
on that list my now. If one is missing let me know.

>>> Comments, flames, counter proposals?
> See above :-)
>>
>> Cheers
>> Lydia
> p.s. I'm not blasting you personally btw, just the idea :-D
>
>>
>> --
>> Lydia Pintscher
>> Amarok community manager
>> kde.org - amarok.kde.org - kubuntu.org
>> claimid.com/nightrose
>> _______________________________________________
>> Amarok-devel mailing list
>> Amarok-devel at kde.org
>> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/amarok-devel
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkmqnpoACgkQ2yWVgjgEOKQKkgCgrSI9v8hF6IcoiZurQ+2ldYTN
> ubEAoI1RCWhGkTptv8HaD0mgNW7VUY+Z
> =S6OS
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> Amarok-devel mailing list
> Amarok-devel at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/amarok-devel
>




-- 
Lydia Pintscher
Amarok community manager
kde.org - amarok.kde.org - kubuntu.org
claimid.com/nightrose