[Kdenlive-devel] Draft mantis policy - RFC

[jb]

On Tuesday 11 November 2008 07.27:08 Mads Bondo Dydensborg wrote:

> > 1. Would I be correct in assuming that issues that require *developer*
> > feedback rather than *user* feedback would be best left at
> > "acknowledged"? I'm assuming this so that dev's can focus on just
> > looking at Acknowledged and Assigned (to them) statuses without
> > getting caught up in the mass of "Feedback Needed" issues.

Seems a good idea to me. In my opinion, the "Feedback" status should be 
assigned when it is not possible to continue working on the bug until some 
answer or confirmation is given by the reporter.

> My idea was to add (as soon as 0.7.0 is out of the door) at least a "future
> version", and perhaps also rename 0.7.1 to "next version". Then, do a rough
> cut, where the most ambitious stuff gets moved to "future version". Good
> thing: Easy to do. Bad thing: May very well disappoint some users that a
> feature keeps getting postponed with every new version. Again, very much
> open for discussion.

Yes. We will probably discover some very embarassing bugs just after the 0.7 
release, so it is very likely that the 0.7.1 release will only have a few new 
features but some important bugfixes.

> > 3. On a different note, I'm wondering about how normal, non-compiling
> > humans will be able to get the Kdenlive 0.7 release. Presumably the
> > KBW will continue to provide builds of the cutting edge, development
> > version (eg .7.1.x) and so it won't be suitable for people just
> > wanting a stable 0.7 release. Can we just tar.gz up the binary folder
> > that KBW creates and release that for specific platforms (a la
> > Blender) known to have dependencies in certain places? I'm probably

Most distros have packages for Kdenlive 0.5, and I think it is safe to assume 
that there also will be for the 0.7 release. It may take a few weeks, but I am 
confident that If users ask their distro, packages will appear.

I am not really wanting to create statically linked packages, I personally 
prefer to leave the packaging job to the distros, since it integrates better 
with the user's system. Also, Kdenlive relies on a lot of libraries and it 
would be unproductive to do a huge statically linked package in my opinion.

regards