2.1.0 release plan proposal

[Orville Bennett]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On Mar 1, 2009, at 10:45 AM, Lydia Pintscher wrote:

> On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 16:14, Orville Bennett <illogical1 at gmail.com>  
> wrote:
>>> 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.
>> I see what you're saying, but if these patches are important enough  
>> to
>> send off to packagers (who will release them), doesn't that  
>> implicitly
>> make then important enough to make a release from?
>
> Not necessarily no.
> If it is a critical fix I will of course do a 2.0.3. But if there are
Ok good enough for me. :-)

> no critical fixes I am not going to do it. If someone else wants to
> please say so.
Holler at me beforehand if you think you'll need some help and i'll  
try to lend a hand.

> Sending 2 or 3 non-critical but very-nice-to-have patches to the
> packagers would be a service and no-one would be obliged to actually
> package them.
>
>
> Cheers
> Lydia
>
> -- 
> 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)

iEYEARECAAYFAkmq/tYACgkQ2yWVgjgEOKTM9QCgnFWsiYQcEXWxsad251dN/KV2
pB8An2+7LU3o6R99pt4nmQBVijEeP7oJ
=qm1w
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----