[Kde-games-devel] Regression testing

Tom Albers toma at kde.org
Thu Jul 2 01:04:16 CEST 2009

Op Wednesday 01 July 2009 23:03 schreef u:
> Am Mittwoch 01 Juli 2009 19:28:51 schrieb Albert Astals Cid:
> > > In the present case, we would NOT abandon Kolf.
> > >
> > > Rather we would abandon Qt 4.5 for now (i.e. hold it over till
> > > KDE 4.4).
> >
> > Sadly it seems its a issue that's being ignored.
> [I'm yet again pulling in release-team@ as my question is also directed 
> towards them.]
> What is if Kolf is not fixed in time? Everyone should agree that we can not 
> ship software that is obviously broken (as in: absolutely unfunctional). Given 
> the reaction on this topic (no one knows the reason, no one really has the 
> time and/or desire to dig into this mess, and Kolf has no maintainer 
> currently), it seems quite realistic that Kolf has to be removed from the 4.3 
> branch.
> My question is: What implications does that have on the timeline? Does removal 
> of an application after RC1 imply RC2, or can we hold our schedule?
> BTW I would also vote to also completely move Kolf 1.9 to tags/unmaintained, 
> as I'm confident to get Kolf 2.0 ready in time for KDE 4.4. It will most 
> probably not have as much features, but it would at least work. But that is 
> another story which is not that urging.
> Greetings
> Stefan
> P.S. Please keep both lists CCd.

I think this is up to the maintainer of kdegames to decide which is Matt Williams. If you are the maintainer of Kolf, I trust Matt to consider your opinion.

If Kolf 2.0 is what is developed in trunk currently and it will be shipped in kde 4.4.0, there is no need to move stuff to unmaintained. That's for real dead apps. We can remove applications, there is no need for an extra RC in that case.

Again, the module maintainer should deal with this, together with the app maintainer.

KDE Developer

More information about the release-team mailing list