The name of Applications 4.14 + 1

Martin Gräßlin mgraesslin at
Thu Jul 17 07:12:37 UTC 2014

On Thursday 17 July 2014 08:49:47 Andreas Cord-Landwehr wrote:
> On Thursday 17 July 2014 08:13:59 Shantanu Tushar Jha wrote:
> > Looking from a user's perspective who has been using KDE for some
> time now,
> > this sounds confusing. The reason is that Plasma is 5 and then
> applications
> > will be called, its just too much of a difference. And I'm not
> > just
> > guessing, I've answered questions from such users on #kde while trying
> not
> > to confuse them and it was difficult.
> Hi, I must admit that I see it rather the opposite way :)
> For me (when looking back at my user-but-not-developer time), I was
> always slightly confused why KDE SC release numbers were different to the
> application versions. Using a naming scheme that only carries the date of
> the release  would solve this.
> One could argue that this is the same with KF5/Plasma as they also consist
> of several apps/libs with their own version numbers. But from my point of
> view, KF5/Plasma are something that is "more consistent" in providing a
> foundation for development or a consistent user experience, which an
> applications release hardly can do.
> If using naming schemes like YYYY.MM, what would be the style for minor
> releases? Appending days is probably not a good solution ;) Yet increasing
> the month counter would not make it clear if the release is a major or a
> minor/bugfix release.

In the Plasma team we considered the YYYY.MM scheme. We thought about 
YYYY.MM.x with x being 0, 1, 2... for the bugfix releases. So the initial 
release would be 2014.12.0 while the January bugfix release would be 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <>

More information about the release-team mailing list