More Plasma bug fix releases

[Sebastian Kügler]

On Tuesday, October 27, 2015 10:58:34 PM Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> El Tuesday 27 October 2015, a les 14:39:15, Eric Hameleers va escriure:
> > On Tue, 27 Oct 2015, Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> > > El Tuesday 27 October 2015, a les 14:18:01, Eric Hameleers va escriure:
> > >
> > > Yes, of course yes.
> > >
> > > Every single patch commited to a stable branch is a bugfix and thus the
> > > developer considers critical and should be released as soon as possible
> > > to
> > > users, otherwise instead of to the stable branch the developer would
> > > commited the patch to the development branch.
> >
> > You developers are so funny, my false teeth fell out from shaking.

If you really want to promote uncalled-for sarcasm, an us vs. them attitude 
and -- frankly -- a lacking sense of humour, this is the wrong place. Let's 
keep it a bit more productive here, please.

> I did a serious reply to your comment and all i got back was sarcasm,
> please  let's try to be constructive, otherwise what's the point of having
> this discussions?
> 
> Do you really think we commit things that are not bugfixes to stable
> branches?
> 
> Can you name some "meh stuff" that was commited to a stable branch and in
> your  opinion should have waited for the next major release?

Indeed, our git stable branches are exactly what you were asking for (in so 
far I understand you well enough). It's a set of patches we deem critical 
bugfixes to our stable branches.

If I were to supply you with a patch set I'd recommend to apply on top of the 
latest release, I'd simply give you exactly the patches in that branch: they 
have been reviewed and even give you the most likely working snapshot, usually 
this is the best tested (CI and manual) stuff you can get.

I simply don't see the difference between what you're after and our git stable 
branches, so if I don't understand you well, a clearer explanation would be 
helpful. As Albert said, examples for a git stable branch that does not meet 
your requirement would also be useful, so we can look at it, and if needed 
make adjustments. I'd be happy to hear what "meh" stuff ended up in bugfix 
releases, because if it's really a "meh" patch (bringing unnecessary risks at 
not enough gain), we can try harder to prevent these from getting in. (I'm not 
aware of any, so I'm not even sure there is a problem.)
-- 
sebas

http://www.kde.org | http://vizZzion.org