2.2 beta 2 reminder
modestas at vainius.eu
Mon Sep 14 13:37:42 CEST 2009
On pirmadienis 14 Rugsėjis 2009 11:03:06 Lydia Pintscher wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 09:35, Bart Cerneels <bart.cerneels at kde.org> wrote:
> > Beta 2 is coming to fast for me. I'm currently drowning in work and
> > house planning. Could this be delayed for another week.
> > Or will there be a beta 3 for sure? In any case, the podcast support
> > is missing functionality that in my and the users mind can not be
> > missing from any feature release.
> There is no plan right now for beta 3. Either we do final by 28th or
> we will have another 6 months of Kubuntu and Fedora users with even
> worse podcast support because they will be using 2.1, no? That means
> another 2 weeks to work on stuff. I know that is tight but that's what
> we have to work with.
FWIW, I do not believe that you can get a good product in ~4 weeks from the
release of the first development version. Given this schedule, it is already
obvious that 2.2.1 will be much less critical-bug free than 2.2.0 even before
the latter is released. I do believe that if the release process was extended
to 1,25-1,5 months, 2.2.0 would be much better (even if not yet suitable for
distro final release, but distro requirements vary).
However, still concerns about obsolete versions (2.1) in fresh distros are
valid. So while you cannot change the date of the first Beta 1 nor the final
release date, I suggest the following for 2.2 release process:
1) Shorten current "packager delay" period at least in half (to 24-36 hours)
for development versions. You just can't afford long delay at the moment, you
need more testers of the current (not 3 days old) code base ASAP. Those
distros, who care, will package it for their own good, those who don't, well,
it is a devel release anyway. However, do not shorten "packager delay" of
2) In my option, you have to do RC. Do not underestimate psychological effect
of RC milestone on all parties involved: developers (no huge changes
afterwards), packagers (maybe stable enough to give to a greater userbase?)
and user base/bug reporters (probably I should bother to report this bug or
2.2 will really be released with it). FWIW, I do not believe in good final
releases straight from Beta (frankly, your 2.1.0 was like RC rather than final
3) Two devel versions are simply not enough. Amarok is rather complex and
featureful so a typical user does not test more than 20-40% of its
capabilities. So you need a greater set of testers of the recent code base.
IMHO, three pre-releases (two betas and RC) are fine to incrementally grow
user base of devel versions.
Therefore, to sum up, I would suggest the following in order to meet your
ambitious and forced deadline: tag Beta 2 on 14th as scheduled (release a day
later), then tag RC1 a week later on 21th (release a day later). Finally, tag
2.2 and release it as planned.
Modestas Vainius <modestas at vainius.eu>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/amarok-devel/attachments/20090914/a54cc291/attachment.sig
More information about the Amarok-devel