2 kirigami fixes for a point release

[Kevin Ottens]

Hello,

Since I'm not on release-team I'm discovering this just now.

On Wednesday, 12 February 2020 21:59:32 CET Nate Graham wrote:
> [+ frameworks and plasma mailing lists]
> 
> On 2020-02-12 11:31, Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> > El dimecres, 12 de febrer de 2020, a les 15:37:09 CET, Nate Graham va 
escriure:
> >> Personally I think it would be nice to have
> >> 86f988434cd657e77cc9429e78f7290ce6b5713d since otherwise LTS Plasma
> >> users will be hitting it for the next few years.
> >> 
> >> ---
> >> 
> >> On another note, I have to admit I'm starting to doubt how well our LTS
> >> Plasma product works without a corresponding LTS frameworks release to
> >> support it. We can fix bugs in software that uses the Plasma release
> >> schedule till the cows come home, but if the bug is in Frameworks, users
> >> are stuck with it forever since LTS distros don't typically ship new
> >> Frameworks releases.
> >> 
> >> Yes yes, they should, and all that--but they don't.
> >> 
> >> It seems like we either need to:
> >> - Work on convincing these distros to ship Frameworks versions in a
> >> rolling manner to their LTS users
> >> - Provide an LTS Frameworks product that can receive bugfixes and get
> >> point releases, to support the Plasma LTS product
> >> - Stop misleadingly offering a Plasma LTS product, since everything in
> >> it that comes from Frameworks isn't actually LTS
> > 
> > This should not matter, Plasma LTS is built on *lots* of other libraries
> > that are not LTS either.
> > 
> > If it matters is because the quality of KF5 releases are not good, that's
> > what should be fixed IMHO.
> Yes, the Frameworks 5.67 release was indeed was quite buggy and
> regression-filled from a Plasma perspective :(
> 
> However buggy releases are the proximate cause, not the root cause. We
> have to ask: what causes buggy releases?

Well, I'd first ask, which parts of frameworks are buggy in 5.67? Which are 
the affected frameworks? If we're talking about a couple in a set of 80, I'd 
first ask what those have in common that the others don't?

I'd look at all that before blaming and overhauling the release model of KF 
which served us well for the past years.

Sorry if there are obvious answers to the questions above, again, I just 
stepped in. ;-)

Regards.
-- 
Kevin Ottens, http://ervin.ipsquad.net

enioka Haute Couture - proud patron of KDE, https://hc.enioka.com/en
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/release-team/attachments/20200213/68cc5ed6/attachment.sig>