with oxygen-icons we make a new oxygen-icons5 repository that nothing will be destroyed in kde4.
cheers Andreas 2018-02-23 13:45 GMT+01:00 Mark Kretschmann <kretschm...@kde.org>: > Hello Heiko, > > this sounds like a good proposal. I can also provide some help as I've > done releases in the past. > > About merging KF5 branch into master, I'm not sure how feasible this is > considering that both branches have diverged a lot. Perhaps we will need to > ask the admins to switch (or rather rename) KF5 to master and master to > something else. > > > Regards, > Mark > > > On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 10:09 PM, Heiko Becker <heire...@exherbo.org> > wrote: > >> Hello everybody, >> >> On 01/26/18 13:45, Matěj Laitl wrote: >> > Hi Stefano, >> > I totally agree, 2.9 should be released to push the work done to users. >> >> I agree, although I don't really know how adoption by distros will turn >> out, considering Qt4 is EOL since quite some time, same for KDELibs >> (although not that long). But a release isn't that much effort and at >> least shows some activity and maybe provides incentive to contribute and >> if all that fails it's at least a fixed point before the port to Qt5/KF5. >> >> > I unfortunately won't find time to do it myself, but: try to start >> > making the release yourself! ;) It should be documented quite well. >> >> I'd be willing to tackle this, if nobody steps up (which appears to be >> the case at the moment, sorry if I stepped on any toes). Being a >> packager and having done a few extragear releases with releaseme should >> be quite helpful. >> >> So, I propose the following schedule: >> >> - 1 week to find out what can be fixed in short time with low manpower >> or should be disabled (e.g cover search services) >> - Create tarball afterward, give packagers and others some time to test >> - If all goes well release on March, 5th >> - Merge kf5 (which isn't unusable after the latest patches from Malte) >> into master afterwards >> >> > If you get stuck or need help with particular tasks, speak up on ML (and >> > CC me), I'm quite confident somebody from us will help. (people usually >> > procrastinate "big" tasks, but answering a concrete questions is much >> > easier) >> >> What I'm a bit unsure about is how to communicate the release. Something >> along the lines "This release might not be as polished as past releases, >> but there's some activity and bug fixes, a port to KF5 and any help is >> certainly welcome."? >> >> Cheers, >> Heiko >> >> > On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 8:43 PM Stefano Pettini >> > <stefano.pett...@gmail.com <mailto:stefano.pett...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> > >> > Hi Matej, >> > >> > have you received my last message to the mailing list? What's your >> > opinion? Sadly the project seems really abandoned, still it doesn't >> > mean we can't do a last release. I also wrote to Myriam, she didn't >> > answer, hope everything is fine. >> > >> > Stefano >> > >> > >> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> > From: *Stefano Pettini* <stefano.pett...@gmail.com >> > <mailto:stefano.pett...@gmail.com>> >> > Date: Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 10:05 AM >> > Subject: A proposal to release 2.9 >> > To: firstname.lastname@example.org <mailto:email@example.com> >> > >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > it's many years now that Amarok 2.9 is about to be released. The >> > saturday-morning emails remember us weekly that there are still a >> > couple of regressions since years. In the meanwhile development >> > almost stopped, but not completely. I, like many, contributed with >> > small but important patches (otherwise we would haven't dedicated >> > time to provide such fixes). >> > >> > I think it's fair if the work since 2.8 is not wasted and 2.9 is >> > released. >> > >> > Current regressions are minor bugs, the only annoying thing not >> > working anymore is the cover search. But it's not a newly-introduced >> > regression, just the world changed and all the services used for >> > cover search become not available anymore. It's not a problem not >> > present in 2.8 that people would face when updating to 2.9. It's >> > already broken now. >> > >> > I would disable what doesn't work to not give false impressions, >> > removing the broken services from cover search, and release 2.9. >> > This would fix the access to wikipedia and other bugs we dedicated >> > time to. >> > >> > Cover search can be restored later, if developers find time to >> > dedicate to it and somebody reviews the available services and >> > select the suitable ones for the future Amarok. >> > >> > Regards, >> > Stefano >> > >