[Kopete-devel] Post 3.2 Kopete and packagers

[Jason Keirstead]

On November 25, 2003 2:54 pm, Martijn Klingens wrote:
> It _is_ needed, unless KDE itself releases more frequently.
>
> Release Early, Release Often, it's that simple.

To quote my other mail:

"I don't know why people keep saying this, it's totally backwards.

Being part of the release cycle is *better* for features. You get a longer 
time period to implement and test new features properly, and get proper 
planning of what features are needed via release schedules so you can 
properly focus your time.

When we aren't using  the KDE release schedule things just turn into a huge 
mess. We're releasing every few months, which results in features getting 
rushed in and debugged on a part by part basis, instead of considering the 
product as a whole and doing them properly from the get-go, which is much 
easier when you have 8-10 months do design, develop, refactor, develop...
(repeat as needed), instead of having to freeze the code every 8 weeks for 
another release.

Having longer release cycles with proper planning, followed up by extended 
freeze periods for testing is a much better plan than the "release early, 
release often" statagy many OS projects fall victim to, which in the end 
always ends up being "release broken stuff early, fix it, release broken 
stuff early again". 

That paradigm is great for tacking on features like piecemeal, but it's no way 
to develop a properly design application. Over time you just end up with a 
huge mess."

>  If we would have a development cycle twice as long that would mean more 
features per release, but that's not what we need.

The main thing is it wouldn't mean more features. It would mean properly 
implemented, well tested features.

For example, look at our KABC "integration". all it really is is a minor hack 
on. There is no real integration whatsoever, and the reason for this is the 
3.2 freeze. Now after 3.2 more pieces will be hacked on to try and complete 
it, etc etc. It seems like this is all this project does is hack stuff in. 
Mainly because there is not enough time between its over-frequent releases to 
properly design, develop, re-adjust, redevelop, etc etc a feature to get it 
right the first time.

> I think marketing-wise KDE is much better off with more frequent releases
> to keep the buzz going.

Like Till said, leave the marketing to the MBAs. I am more interested in 
making solid applications then creating a buzz. If your app is good then it 
makes its own buzz without needing to release half-finished features every 4 
months.

-- 
There's no place like 127.0.0.1

http://www.keirstead.org