KDE4 release discussion, Was: KIO::NetAccess static methods question

[Jordi]

On 10/27/07, Kurt Pfeifle <k1pfeifle at gmx.net> wrote:
>
> Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> > On Thursday 25 October 2007, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> >> because not releasing doesn't make an open source software better. it
> just
> >
> > it occurred to me while reading this that maybe there's a difference in
> > expectations here.
> >
> > personaly, i do not expect kde 4.0 to be a release that comes
> preinstalled on
> > computer systems or a release that one would put out into production
> > deployments.
> >
> > this is not because of a failure of KDE 4.0 or anything like that. 4.0should
> > simply not be that kind of release at all. period. it should be
> something
> > that lets us get that working draft out into the hands of people who are
> > closest to us, but not us. emphasis on "working" but also on "draft".
>
> I understand that. But to make the rest of the world understand too (that
> rest that cares about KDE at all), it seems to me that we've got to invent
> a new name for that release. A name that reflects what you said above.
>
> Because what you just said, re-defines a "x dot zero" release. It re-
> defines what "x dot zero" (especially for cases where "x > 1") means to
> most people.
>
> Most people (while still be a bit cautious because of the "zero" in the
> name, and expecting more bugs and less polish) will *not* see it as a
> "draft". "drafts" are what "Alpha" releases are perceived as. "Betas"
> start to become usable and "RC" means: "we don't know of any more bugs
> ourselves other than the 5 we list in the release notes -- not *you*
> *users* please help us find the ones we didn't see".
>
> So what kind of additionally naming tag could we add to the "KDE4 4.0"
> release that transports (or helps to transport) your redefined meaning
> of that release number?
>
> "KDE4 0.8 platform technology preview release for Beta Testing End Users"?
> (not meant to be a serious name suggestion -- just throwing a few name
> tags into a single mix as food for thoughts...)




I agree, much of the users and even some not well informed distribution
packagers think that KDE 4 would be a "improved in every aspect" version of
KDE 3.5

The KDE 4 hype can not be denied.
So the options are (as I read this discussion)

-Let's KDE 4.0 be KDE 4.0  and users must understand the work after KDE 4
and understand that logically should be buggier than usual. KDE fans will
understand it and help us make KDE 4.1 better.

-Call KDE 4.0 KDE 4 (some name here) where the name shows that you may or
may not want to change your stable 3.5 for the new 4.0 version.


In both options we have to explain what the new release means and what to
expect from it. (and explain it the sooner the better)

I think that the second option will scare some people and distributions, the
same people that would only whine about how buggy the new KDE is not helping
at all.

So... don't see any problem with releasing "KDE 4 X version" now and "KDE
4.0 " in some months. For X, I said in an previous mail, I like "premiere"
version. Seems like "for you, our KDE fan, join the (bug) party"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20071027/c2bb6b17/attachment.htm>