Fwd: KDE Frameworks Release Cycle

[Martin Graesslin]

On Sunday 04 May 2014 08:09:21 Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On May 4, 2014 4:25:25 AM EDT, Martin Graesslin <mgraesslin at kde.org> wrote:
> >On Wednesday 30 April 2014 21:56:12 Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> >> On Wednesday, April 30, 2014 11:35:54 Àlex Fiestas wrote:
> >> > On Tuesday 29 April 2014 19:23:07 Scott Kitterman wrote:
> >> > > For non-rolling distros, at some point you have to stop and
> >
> >release. A
> >
> >> > > mix
> >> > > of new features and bug fixes aren't going to be allowed in.
> >> > > 
> >> > > We (Kubuntu) have been delivering KDE SC point releases as
> >
> >post-release
> >
> >> > > updates to our users for most (maybe all) KDE4 releases. That's
> >
> >over
> >
> >> > > with
> >> > > KF5.
> >> > > 
> >> > > We'll, I guess, have to settle for cherry picking fixes and doing
> >
> >our
> >
> >> > > best.
> >> > 
> >> > You might not know this but most developers don't do proper testing
> >
> >in the
> >
> >> > stable branches because the cost of having master and stable
> >
> >environments
> >
> >> > and doing testing in both branches for each fix is too much, we
> >
> >simply
> >
> >> > don't have the manpower for that.
> >> > 
> >> > History has shown this maaaany times, we have done point releases
> >
> >that
> >
> >> > were
> >> > horrible quality-wise because nobody was testing them. The stable
> >
> >branches
> >
> >> > have virtually no users.
> >> 
> >> maybe not among developers...
> >> But all normal users who just install KDE from some distro are users
> >
> >of the
> >
> >> stable branches.
> >
> >I think Alex meant something different: the branch does not have any
> >testers
> >before it's rolled to the users. Which means that regressions are not
> >caught
> >before they hit the users.
> 
> At least for Kubuntu, the amount of upstream testing is well understood. We
> do a fair amount of testing before releasing to our end users.
> 
> More upstream testing would, of course, be lovely, but I don't see the
> current situation as particularly problematic.
> 
> From my point of view, point releases are very much tested before being
> released to end users.

I think it's great that Kubuntu does downstream testing. But what would be 
much better is if Kubuntu would do the testing upstream. E.g. I'm sometimes 
too scared to take a patch into the branch as it doesn't get tested. Thus 
Kubuntu's testing will never reach it. If the testing were be done upstream I 
could include the scary patches and would know that there is a safety net of 
testers to catch a regression.

Cheers
Martin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/release-team/attachments/20140504/a24195b9/attachment.sig>