policy change related to kdelibs snapshots

[Thomas Zander]

On Monday 10 July 2006 01:02, Michaël Larouche wrote:
> If we need a more dynamic way to develop KDE4, then we should drop
> kdelibs4_snapshot. Maybe that will bring more peoples(i.e applications
> developers) trying to stabilize kdelibs.

So, reading between the lines, you feel that the reason kdelibs has been 
extremely unstable for so long is because there is not enough manpower 
and you would like to get help from the app developers?

I'm pretty sure that the suggestion you make above will have the opposite 
effect for the same reason that right now there are not a lot of people 
working on libs.  Its too hard to get into libs development.
The people already developing in libs don't have enough time to help a 
newbee 'get into' the code and basically its not fun to have to recompile 
almost everything so often.

So; I support Coolo's suggestion.

Expand the universe of kdelibs-developers to include the apps as well. So 
changes done in libs will have to be judged on their actual effects. But 
all this done in a different branch to not actually effect the app 
developers.  This reduces the bi-weekly snapshot to an effort of 
(auto)-merging branches. And KOffice will be in an unstable state for 
minimum time v.s. the days it is now.

-- 
Thomas Zander
-------------- 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/20060710/8e8b8c54/attachment.sig>