A proposal to release 2.9

[Stefano Pettini]

Hi everybody,

it looks like there's a general agreement on releasing 2.9 from master,
Myriam is also fine with the plan. I said in the past I wanted to do it but
I have no experience and time so if Heiko can do it then I would prefer
this solution.

About KF5 and master, what's the plan? Merging the two, cherrypicking
patches since the fork or just abandoning master? I would not favor the
last solution as time was spent by many, including me, for useful fixes and
I would like to make sure that these are not lost (same reason why I
proposed to release 2.9).

It would be nice to fix the cover search, but this requires reviewing the
services available in 2018 and the license of their APIs. If none of the
services works, I would gray out the option on the menu.

Regards,
Stefano

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 10:09 PM, Heiko Becker <heirecka at exherbo.org> wrote:

> Hello everybody,
>
> On 01/26/18 13:45, Matěj Laitl wrote:
> > Hi Stefano,
> > I totally agree, 2.9 should be released to push the work done to users.
>
> I agree, although I don't really know how adoption by distros will turn
> out, considering Qt4 is EOL since quite some time, same for KDELibs
> (although not that long).  But a release isn't that much effort and at
> least shows some activity and maybe provides incentive to contribute and
> if all that fails it's at least a fixed point before the port to Qt5/KF5.
>
> > I unfortunately won't find time to do it myself, but: try to start
> > making the release yourself! ;) It should be documented quite well.
>
> I'd be willing to tackle this, if nobody steps up (which appears to be
> the case at the moment, sorry if I stepped on any toes). Being a
> packager and having done a few extragear releases with releaseme should
> be quite helpful.
>
> So, I propose the following schedule:
>
> - 1 week to find out what can be fixed in short time with low manpower
> or should be disabled (e.g cover search services)
> - Create tarball afterward, give packagers and others some time to test
> - If all goes well release on March, 5th
> - Merge kf5 (which isn't unusable after the latest patches from Malte)
> into master afterwards
>
> > If you get stuck or need help with particular tasks, speak up on ML (and
> > CC me), I'm quite confident somebody from us will help. (people usually
> > procrastinate "big" tasks, but answering a concrete questions is much
> > easier)
>
> What I'm a bit unsure about is how to communicate the release. Something
> along the lines "This release might not be as polished as past releases,
> but there's some activity and bug fixes, a port to KF5 and any help is
> certainly welcome."?
>
> Cheers,
> Heiko
>
> > On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 8:43 PM Stefano Pettini
> > <stefano.pettini at gmail.com <mailto:stefano.pettini at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >     Hi Matej,
> >
> >     have you received my last message to the mailing list? What's your
> >     opinion? Sadly the project seems really abandoned, still it doesn't
> >     mean we can't do a last release. I also wrote to Myriam, she didn't
> >     answer, hope everything is fine.
> >
> >     Stefano
> >
> >
> >     ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >     From: *Stefano Pettini* <stefano.pettini at gmail.com
> >     <mailto:stefano.pettini at gmail.com>>
> >     Date: Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 10:05 AM
> >     Subject: A proposal to release 2.9
> >     To: amarok-devel at kde.org <mailto:amarok-devel at kde.org>
> >
> >
> >     Hi,
> >
> >     it's many years now that Amarok 2.9 is about to be released. The
> >     saturday-morning emails remember us weekly that there are still a
> >     couple of regressions since years. In the meanwhile development
> >     almost stopped, but not completely. I, like many, contributed with
> >     small but important patches (otherwise we would haven't dedicated
> >     time to provide such fixes).
> >
> >     I think it's fair if the work since 2.8 is not wasted and 2.9 is
> >     released.
> >
> >     Current regressions are minor bugs, the only annoying thing not
> >     working anymore is the cover search. But it's not a newly-introduced
> >     regression, just the world changed and all the services used for
> >     cover search become not available anymore. It's not a problem not
> >     present in 2.8 that people would face when updating to 2.9. It's
> >     already broken now.
> >
> >     I would disable what doesn't work to not give false impressions,
> >     removing the broken services from cover search, and release 2.9.
> >     This would fix the access to wikipedia and other bugs we dedicated
> >     time to.
> >
> >     Cover search can be restored later, if developers find time to
> >     dedicate to it and somebody reviews the available services and
> >     select the suitable ones for the future Amarok.
> >
> >     Regards,
> >     Stefano
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/amarok-devel/attachments/20180224/ed27192a/attachment.html>