[Kopete-devel] Post 3.2 Kopete and packagers

[Jason Keirstead]

On November 25, 2003 05:14 pm, Martijn Klingens wrote:

> Sure, we could (and probably should) have a release cycle for Kopete as
> well. 
 Until now we didn't really have a release _cycle_, we just
> implemented stuff and when the new stuff was considered finished we began
> evaluating a new release. And while having a more formal Kopete release
> cycle is a good thing, how is it better to use the KDE release cycle rather
> than having our own at twice the rate? As long as you have a cycle in the
> first place it's ok. 

Not really. The shorter the cycle is the less stuff you get to do properly because
of the frequent freezings.

> We could argue that a longer freeze is important,

No, a longer development cycle is important. Following from that you
do need a longer freeze at the end yes.

> This is self-contradicting. If you get it right the first time you don't
> need 
 to re-adjust and redevelop. If you need to re-adjust and redevelop
> you get EXACTLY what we have been doing until now. 

Nothing is ever perfect the first time. The more time you have to poke
at it the better it will be for the users.

> PS: Reading the above I'm not sure if we should continue this discussion
> here. 
 If anyone replies and it's not really on-topic for core-devel it
> might be better to move this off to kopete-devel instead. Even better of
> course would be to stop bitching about how bad we apparently have been
> doing and start coding instead,

I have been CC'ing all these messages to both Kopete-devel and core-devel because
it will impact KDE greatly. A decision needs to be made on this _NOW_ as Zack and Rob
keep saying. Since so many developers are disagreeing there needs to be a vote or
something, and it needs to be done very soon.


-- 
There's no place like 127.0.0.1

http://www.keirstead.org