deeper freeze

[Rob Kaper]

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 12:51:10PM +0100, Stephan Kulow wrote:
> Yes. If you consider being forced to test the desktop instead
> of continuously patching it, punishing - then I punish you.

But what good is testing the desktop if we cannot attempt to fix problems we
encounter?

> I don't know if you actually figured, but if you read kde-cvs, _many_
> of that little patches turn out to break another aspect or do not compile,
> or have to be discussed, etc. That's the way open source development
> (within KDE) works - just not a two weeks before scheduled release.

So we'll just commit after the release, oh wait, no, that's just a couple
of weeks before the scheduled 3.2.1.. so we'd better not fix any bugs but
major ones when backporting..

I agree with Waldo on having another Beta if HEAD is not as stable and
perfect as it should be. Developers *will* want to fix bugs and it's better
to have regressions now and release later, than to release now and have the
regressions in the branch.

Rob
-- 
Rob Kaper     | "In the name of sheer pity, won't someone operate on
cap at capsi.com | Chairman Arafat and put that poor cancer into a cleaner
www.capsi.com | environment? -- Rick Brookhiser
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20031112/552b06fe/attachment.sig>