KDE 3.1: delayed

Michael Brade brade at kde.org
Fri Dec 6 10:50:56 GMT 2002

On Friday 06 December 2002 08:51, Stephan Binner wrote:
> Provocative question: Why do we depend on binary packages?
> [...] it's the distributor's
> problem and not ours. Or does anyone think that they will delay security
> fixed KDE 3.0.6 packages to next year too just because packager and/or part
> of security team is on vacation?
> I vote for option a): take the time you need for the audit, give the
> packagers the usual one week and release. This will raise more bug reports
> than RC5. And it's no problem if for lazy distributions first packages will
> exist for 3.1.1.
Yes, also my thoughts. I'd rather see KDE 3.1 this year, although Dirk is not 
too wrong about the number of bugreports. I'm responsible for KDE 3.1 in my 
university and people say 3.1 is not as stable as 3.1rcX. No idea about this, 
fact is that khtml and kmail are crashing quite often :-/ So a delay at least 
doesn't hurt in general (only my feelings ;)

Michael Brade;                 KDE Developer, Student of Computer Science
  |-mail: echo brade !#|tr -d "c oh"|s\e\d 's/e/\@/2;s/$/.org/;s/bra/k/2'
  °--web: http://www.kde.org/people/michaelb.html

KDE 3: The Next Generation in Desktop Experience

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: signature
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20021206/42b460b6/attachment.sig>

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list