KDE 4.1 planning

Joseph M. Gaffney CuCullin at WtFisThat.net
Tue Jan 8 20:48:51 CET 2008

John Tapsell wrote:
> On 08/01/2008, Dirk Mueller <mueller at kde.org> wrote:
>> On Tuesday 08 January 2008, John Tapsell wrote:
>>> If we go for every 9 months and sync in best possible with the main
>>> distros, then it means that there is up to a year between a bug being
>>> fixed and the user being able to get that new version.  That's too
>>> long imho.
>> You're entirely wrong in this case. if we go for a 9 month release cycle, we
>> align perfectly with the next after the next distro release. If we go with a
>> 6 month release cycle for 4.1, we don't align to anything and are again just
>> in the middle of nowhere with our bugfix and feature schedule.
> I thought it was obvious that I was talking more long term, rather
> than focusing just on the next release.
> If we go for a 9 month release cycle, then sure we might align with
> the next distro release, but what about the one after that?
> John
If its a 9 month release, worst case is one distribution release without 
a new KDE 4.x release right (one including the newest, then one without, 
for a 6 month release cycle - no distro I can think is faster than 
that).  However, many of the others are without a release cycle, some 
are 9mos-1yr, etc.  With a 6 month release cycle, I would think more 
distributions would skip releases than include them.  With a 9 month 
release cycle, it would likely give a bit more time to spread out 
betas/rc's, and be generally inbetween the majority of release schedules 
for distros (for those that have them).

Just a thought


More information about the release-team mailing list