releasing inplications

[Sven Langkamp]

On Sunday 13 March 2005 15:21, Casper Boemann wrote:
> On Sunday 13 March 2005 14:54, Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
> > Those are not what I see as the big advantage of a release: having a
> > release transforms an application from being a playground to something
> > real. We need that, or, more accurately, _I_ need that. Krita has to stop
> > being a promise and grow up. The only way is through exposure to the big
> > bad world. We'll get a lot flak for sure, because after all these years
> > we still don't have a 16-bit/channel, cmm-enabled (okay, we've got that,
> > but only rudimentary) Gimp killer with a side-order of real media
> > painting. But if we don't do a release, we won't get there anyway.
>
> Sure, and I wasn't saying that we shouldn't release. In fact I think wo
> should release often.
>
> My qualm is the strictness off releasing as part of ko. They release to
> slowly for a developing application
I have no problem with shorter release cycles, but there are things which will 
need a lot of time e.g. 16-bit or the KDE4 porting.

So I think Krita should be released as part of KOffice with the normal 
releases and between them release with a feature-based schedule. If we split 
up the everything in more plugins it might good if we would have some kind of 
unit tests for them.

We can still see how things look like after the 1.0 release.