On Thursday, September 29, 2011 23:57:53 Scott Kitterman wrote: > I don't like the fact that KDE developers decided to ignore their own policy > on maintenance updates. I think it breaks your contract with your > downstreams. In the case of what's been done so far, it doesn't have an > impact on us. The changes were in before our release and are technically
the features that got into the 4.7 branch to date have been things that were already worked on before the Frameworks decision was made. it's was an odd cas were features had been worked on while 4.7 was frozen with the expectation of a 4.8 ... and that left us with the choice of having a 4.8 release which we didn't want for those few features, leaving those features out and screwing up the planning of the applications depending on those changes or fudging a little bit. it was a compromise choice made to mimize downside. as with all such compromises, it isn't perfect (ergo the label of 'compromise'), but after looking at the issues and looking at different scenarios we decided this was the best option available to us compared to the others. note that some of the more actively changing and developed code in kdelibs have moved to separate git repositories already to make this issue moot for them (kactivities, nepomuk) -- Aaron J. Seigo humru othro a kohnu se GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43 KDE core developer sponsored by Qt Development Frameworks
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
