Releases in 3 months

[Aaron J. Seigo]

> On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 07:44:35 PM Martin Graesslin wrote:
> > We need to get away from "it's not stable enough" to "it's stable". The
> > only way is to increase the testing and make everything we can do to have
> > an awesome and rocking .0. I think Alex approach is the right one.
> > Reducing the number of features going into a release reduces
> > automatically the number of possible problems. Having master in an always
> > releasable state means there cannot be lots of problems. And I know what

*exactly*!

the reason for the stability problems is a combination of the improper fit of 
the 6 month development cycle combined with a near total lack of workflow for 
how a change makes its way into master.

we can’t use the lack of stability of .0 releases to argue against making 
changes that will improve that ;)

(other improvements are underway in frameworks 5 as well with better definition 
of modules and a greater emphases on unit testing .. so it’s a multi-solution-
required type of problem. i don’t want to suggest a change in release schedule 
will magically fix everything, it will simply allow us to improve the 
situation. perhaps with all the other incremental improvements in our workflow 
we’ll get to “fixed”, though.)

On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 14:23:24 Scott Kitterman wrote:
> I've mentioned before in this thread, we're going to look into
> providing tip of the stable branch packages that people can test so that
> there is more testing before the point  release happen.  Independent of the
> release cycle discussion, I think this an area that needs improvement.

is there anything upstream developers can help to make this a reality?

-- 
Aaron J. Seigo
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20130712/6f0cdef3/attachment.sig>