[kde-linux] KDE 3 Beta
James Richard Tyrer
tyrerj at acm.org
Wed Oct 31 13:32:49 UTC 2007
> James Richard Tyrer wrote:
>> Anne Wilson wrote:
>>> On Sunday 28 Oct 2007, James Richard Tyrer wrote:
>>>> Perhaps you miss my point, or perhaps I wasn't clear. I have no
>>>> objection to any of the development work that is being done and I do not
>>>> want any of it changed. What I do think is that somehow we need to also
>>>> release a more stable product that is of commercial production quality.
>>>> There are companies and governments which rely on our DeskTop and we
>>>> need to provide them with a high quality product. I see a simple way to
>>>> do this: the stable release should not have new stuff added to it until
>>>> the new stuff meets quality standards. Our current development
>>>> methodology makes this impossible.
>>> The truth is that there are two very different camps. One camp wants the
>>> latest and greatest. The other camp wants stability at any price. That camp
>>> uses Enterprise releases.
>> I am in basic agreement with that idea. That is why I propose two
>> releases stable and unstable.
> The "other camp" is in a different situation than Joe Ordinary User. If
> Joe's system won't come up after an update - oh, well. But if you are IT
> director keeping vital corporate databases alive on a server - you can't
> afford to have that server crash because of some error in an update.
> But, anyway, I thought that's why there were branches of Linux such as
> Stable and Testing/Unstable?
Yes but ... (tm).
Yes, that is the way that Kernel development works, but it is not the
way that KDE development works.
KDE does not supply such a stable KDE branch. So, are we leaving it up
to others to fix the bugs? Is this occurring -- I doubt it.
More information about the kde-linux