KDE 3.1 final tarballs

[Trevor Harmon]

> But I should like to say that, at this time, all developers should be more 
> interested in getting 3.1 done right rather than be doing the cool new 
> features for 3.2.

I totally agree with that for the beta cycle. However, once the first release 
candidate is out, there are only a handful of bugs left, right? (The 
so-called "showstoppers", I mean.) Why should all KDE developers be focused 
on these few bugs when there are so many others to work on? Besides, it seems 
as if I'm actually prevented from fixing bugs because only showstopper fixes 
can be applied to HEAD during the RC phase.

Once HEAD enters RC, I feel it should be branched to KDE_3_1_BRANCH or 
whatever the next stable release is. That way, HEAD could be opened up for 
non-showstopper bug fixes.

> There's no harm in waiting a few more weeks, if it takes 
> that much, to begin working for 3.2. 3.1, however, can't wait.

I guess that's where I have disagreement. I don't think we should have forced 
everyone to work on a few showstopper bugs during the four-week RC cycle we 
just had. I just don't think it's very efficient to have 50 developers fixing 
5 or so bugs.

Trevor