Release Script (KF5)

David Faure faure at
Thu Jul 12 11:26:12 UTC 2012

On Wednesday 27 June 2012 17:21:28 Michael Jansen wrote:
> On Monday, June 25, 2012 01:05:49 PM David Faure wrote:
> > On Monday 25 June 2012 01:16:05 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> > > > If we really want to decouple our releases and be more flexible with
> > > > doing
> > > > them i consider this change a requirement for any decision in that
> > > > regard.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Each and every module has to have its own version number build in. I
> > > > guess
> > > > with the frameworks branch much of kdelibs already got that change (no
> > > > idea
> > > > really, anyone with input?). But we have to do the same with the rest
> > > > of
> > > > our modules.
> > > 
> > > No idea about frameworks. David? Kevin?
> > 
> > This is partly still under discussion.
> > 
> > However the currently implemented solution is that each framework has a
> > versions number, but that version number can be upgraded in all frameworks
> > at the same time, using a script.
> > 
> > A future framework on top of all others, could provide the version number
> > for all apps, much like the current kdeversion.h. Basically it would be
> > the
> > "SC" number, and not the version number of the libs themselves, as is
> > currently the case.
> But that SC number would be a lie. Because you only assume all modules are
> installed in the versions that were release as SC X.Y . You have no idea if
> the user or distro uses older or newer versions for some libraries, modules
> or apps. So that number has no information value. Perhaps some marketing
> value. But in bug reports it is useless.
> Do we release kdelibs as ONE package. Or do we plan to release many small
> packages?

Many small packages, but all at the same time. So "based on KDE Frameworks 
5.0.1" will have some value in bug reports.

However you're right, apps themselves should have their own version number, 
maybe we can solve the same way as we do for the frameworks: by running a 
script that updates the toplevel CMakeLists.txt in all modules before 

> If each library gets released standalone. What if whe make the kde sc
> release 4.10.7. I assume only 70% of all libraries got commits since 4.10.6
> because stuff is pretty stable by now (7th update). Do we still release ALL
> libs or only those that got changed?

All libs, obviously. Who would take the time to run a diff and make really sure 
that nothing changed? This is additional work for nothing and makes everything 
more complex. Just like right now, we release kdeadmin or kdetoys with every 
KDE SC release, even if nothing changed.

> The same naturally goes for stuff like kdeedu now that it split. What if
> some application got no commits since the last minor release. Make a
> release anyway or skip it? For major releases i guess making a package
> anyway makes sense. Or not?

I can't decide there, that's for the release team to decide, but IMHO if it's 
all scripted and done all at once (KDE SC release), then it's simpler to just 
re-release everything.

David Faure, faure at,
Sponsored by Nokia to work on KDE, incl. KDE Frameworks 5

More information about the release-team mailing list