RFC: Calligra press kit

[Markus Slopianka]

I changed the outlook part to include less specifics. I wrote about the switch to a 
4-months cycle and KF5 adoption "at some point".
Better ODF and MSO file support is a given for any new release anyway, so that can stay 
anyhow. ;-)


On Donnerstag 08 Dezember 2011 00:23:34 Jaroslaw Staniek wrote:
> On 7 December 2011 23:53, Markus Slopianka <markus.s at kdemail.net> wrote:
> > On Mittwoch 07 Dezember 2011 22:54:11 C. Boemann wrote:
> >> I think it looks generally very nice. The part about version 3.0 is
> >> incorrect however. We plan for at least 2.5 and 2.6 before 3.0 neither
> >> of which will include support for new qt or kde. Our release schedule
> >> is every 4 months from now on
> > 
> > Well, until Jaroslaw changed it very recently,
> > http://community.kde.org/index.php?title=Calligra&action=historysubmit&di
> > ff=16611&oldid=16017 said nothing about further 2.x releases. ;-)
> 
> I did that exactly to have a placeholder for proposed schedules and
> especially release plans.
> 
> > Anyhow, Calligra (and KOffice before) isn't really the most successful
> > project to keep roadmaps and schedules. I don't believe in a 4 months
> > cycle before I see it. ;-)
> 
> If we do not split feature plans to more frequent releases, we'll not
> move much further...
> 
> > That said with 2.4 pushed to January, maybe February, even when keeping
> > the release cycle, 2.6 would be released in September/October which is
> > already months after the KF5 release in July/August.
> > 
> > The recent thread started by Boudewijn about Qt3Support removal sounded a
> > lot like Qt5 support is coming earlier rather than later with only Kexi
> > being in question. (I suggested porting the Qt3Support parts required by
> > Kexi to Qt5 but didn't get a reply.)
> 
> I think you already get the clue - this is planned but not top priority.
> If it works, do not touch.
> 
> I recently found out that things are even worse. QtScript, as I know
> it, slowly disappears in Qt 5 because of the port to Google's V8
> backend, the API going to be a bit different. Such things interfere with
> planning in projects like Calligra. So I discovered that I have to
> delay all the scripting tasks (not just for Kexi forms/reports but for
> generic ODF stuff too) to minimize losing of the resources.
> No wonder then, that the transition may take more time.
> 
> One can shorten the time by contributing more of course :)
> 
> > Frankly: No way I believe you telling me about a Qt4-based Calligra 3.0
> > release in January/February *2013*, roughly a year after Qt4 was EOLed.
> > Maybe at some point that was agreed on that schedule but didn't know
> > about the Qt5 roadmap then.
> 
> Boemann said about no use of Qt 5 in 2.5 and 2.6. Nothing definitive
> is declared for 3.0.
> This is normal for projects where workforce per app and lib is hard to
> estimate, right?
> Sometimes relatively small fix needs calendar weeks to materialize...
> 
> > Boudewijn's thread (with replies also by Cyrille) is definitely the more
> > recent information. And as Cyrille wrote there: When depending on Qt4,
> > you have to do the maintenance work for it, too. Somehow I don't think
> > anybody is interested in that...
> 
> All depends what is more costly, port to Qt 5 or keep the Qt 4 branch
> alive. This can differ from case to case.
> If you know the industry, Qt 4 will be on the market quite many years from
> now.
> 
> > Well, my document doesn't need to be finished now. If a clear roadmap for
> > 2012 hasn't been decided until a few days before the 2.4 release, the
> > outlook part can also be removed. It's nice to have but non-vital.
> 
> Yes, just let the developers stabilize the apps and libs; transition
> can take less time given the Qt 4->5 change is not big from their
> perspective and they (as in Kexi tables) find resources to find
> temporary solutions to make unported code work with Qt 5 without file
> format/feature degradation. There are certain priorities - 'new' is
> sometimes enemy of 'stable'.