Stable branches, including frameworks for Kubuntu LTS

[Volker Krause]

On Monday, 18 May 2026 17:44:22 Central European Summer Time Nate Graham 
wrote:
> To help move this forward, are there any formal objections to
> Techpaladin people (Marco, me, possibly others) creating stable branches
> for frameworks that we would maintain by backporting bug-fixes already
> on master to, and making releases from those branches as needed?

No objection, just note that using KDE stable branch schemes (as opposed to 
vendor branches) means that KDE stable branch rules apply, e.g. regarding 
string freezes, new features or who can decide what goes in and what doesn't. 
Doesn't look like that's going to be a problem here, but it's an aspect 
learned from the "enterprise3" vendor branches back then which hadn't been 
mentioned here yet I think. Ie. if you need to control the rules, a vendor 
branch is probably the better choice.

Regards,
Volker

> On 5/14/26 10:44 AM, Nate Graham wrote:
> > On 5/14/26 10:38 AM, Allen Winter wrote:
> >> not sure if this is clear:  you'll fix the bugs in the master branches
> >> and backport those fixes to the current release branch and to the LTS
> >> branch?
> >> and you won't add new features as this is only about fixing bugs?
> > 
> > That's correct. This effort is about backporting public bug fixes
> > already on master, not doing private feature development.
> > 
> > Plasma and Gear already have stable branches that can be used for this;
> > the discussion here is really mostly about creating such a thing for a
> > specific Frameworks release so the same thing can be done for it.
> > 
> > Nate
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20260519/284b22e3/attachment.sig>