Proposal unify back our release schedules

[Neal Gompa]

On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 2:29 PM Nate Graham <nate at kde.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 4/22/24 19:19, Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> > El dilluns, 22 d’abril del 2024, a les 17:12:46 (CEST), Nate Graham va
> > escriure:
> >> Now, let's say we make Gear use Plasma's current release schedule by
> >> syncing up the feature releases and adopting the Fibonacci bugfix
> >> releases. If we don't end up changing Plasma's own release schedule then
> >> we already make our promo store more coherent by letting the marketing
> >> team do three big glossy announcements of user-facing products a year,
> >> rather than being stretched thin for 6. Even if we make Plasma go down
> >> to 2 releases a year, then we have two synced Gear+Plasma
> >> "mega-releases" and 2 independent Gear releases--down from 6 to 4. Both
> >> of these options would improve the promo story IMO.
> >>
> >> ---
> >>
> >> Moving on, the biggest points of contention I see revolve around
> >> Frameworks. Personally I want to push back a bit on the idea of
> >> developing an app against released frameworks.
> >
> > I disagree.
> >
> > In my ideal world, applications should be able to be built against a one year
> > old frameworks, before the Qt6 port, Okular's minimum requirement was Ubuntu
> > 22.04, which makes sure virtually everyone can contribute to it without having
> > to build the world.
> >
> > There's virtually no need in Okular to depend against any new frameworks shiny
> > feature, the existing features are more than enough.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >    Albert
>
> This is true for Okular, but we can't guarantee it for other apps.
>
> However I was fortunate enough to be sitting across a table from Volker,
> who explained this point to me in a way that my tiny brain was capable
> of understanding: :) that having a fast Frameworks release cycle allows
> people developing apps with features in Frameworks to not have to live
> on master like we do in Plasma.
>
> I'd love to have everywhere in my slide of KDE what Albert has for
> Okular, but I there are other barriers to it that we need to overcome.
>
> As a result I'll rescind my idea to slow down Frameworks feature
> releases. I do still think Frameworks could benefit from un-branched
> bugfix releases a week after the feature releases--after which point
> feature development would be open again.
>
> And I still support unifying or aligning the Gear and Plasma release
> schedules.
>

Then I think we're back to my idea of monthly frameworks, quarterly
Gear, and semi-annual Plasma with semi-synchronized schedules.



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!