Future frameworks releases

Alexander Potashev aspotashev at gmail.com
Wed Jun 17 23:42:47 UTC 2015

2015-06-18 2:15 GMT+03:00 Aleix Pol <aleixpol at kde.org>:
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 12:03 AM, Alexander Potashev
> <aspotashev at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2015-06-18 0:01 GMT+03:00 Kevin Ottens <ervin at kde.org>:
>>> Bear with me I'll be partly acting from memory here... let's see something
>>> like:
>>>  1) KF5 releases are numbered YYYY.MM;
>>>  2) Individual frameworks are numbered 5.N, N being incremented only if
>>> there's been commits since the last KF5 release;
>>> [*] Note that IMO, that tuning should not involve going toward 5.N.M version
>>> scheme. The 5.N only scheme was intentional and debated quite a bit already.
>>> It's intentional to have a combination of very short cycles and feature +
>>> bugfix on each releases. Packagers were skeptic about it but it's been proven
>>> to work now.
>> Hi Kevin,
>> 5.N.M numbering (or even X.N.M) is what Christian requested in the first place.
>> Probing question: If I translate one string in kcoreaddons5_qt.po into
>> Belarusian language, should we bump and release a new version of
>> KCoreAddons because of that?
> At the moment, we're updating the version regardless you have a new string.


I know. I asked about the suggested approach to skip version bumping
when there were no commits in a framework, not about the current
approach to releasing KF5.

If we are going to recognize translation updates, framework releases
will be needed every month in 99.9% of cases because translations are
much more volatile due to the large number of supported languages.

Alexander Potashev

More information about the release-team mailing list