On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Scott Kitterman <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thursday, November 20, 2014 03:19:10 PM Jonathan Riddell wrote: >> I'd like to propose to the tech board to give an update allowance for new >> versions of KDE Frameworks. I don't expect this to be the quickest of >> discussions so we may as well get started :) >> >> Currently we have a micro release update exception for KDE SC bugfix >> releases. >> >> KDE Frameworks has no bugfix releases because upstream decided they didn't >> have the resources to make them. Instead they have new releases every >> month with both bugfixes and new features. However these are libraries so >> applications will be using the existing ABI and that ABI (the symbols) is >> not allowed to change. The functionality of those symbols is also not >> allowed to change. Any new features are in new symbols and existing >> applications won't use them. So updates in the archive will be bugfix only >> for applications in the archive. > > They already failed at this once, so I don't feel confident in this assertion.
So did kdelibs4. >> Allowing a SRU version exception will allow these bugfixes. It will also >> make it easier for backports of Plasma to use the version of KF5 in the >> archive. It will also make Kubuntu a nicer platform for people developing >> with Qt and KF5 because they'll be able to easily get the latest version. >> >> KF5 is in Utopic but nothing in the archive uses it so it might be a nice >> way to start and reassure everyone it'll be a smooth process. >> >> I'd like to send this to the tech board, any thoughts? > > I'm against it. Against asking? Oo > We got the exception for KDE4 because upstream had an updates policy (which > you wrote/socialized upstream) that was consistent with our SRU requirements. > This is not true for KF5. I don't think that the fact that there was an > exception for KDE4 is relevant. Except that frameworks derive from the same code base, are made by the same people and powers the continuations of previously seen kdelibs4 applications. > The upstream maintenance policy is clearly at odds with our SRU policy, so an > exception is inappropriate. Consider that it's called a micro-release > exception and upstream has decided they aren't doing micro-releases at all. > > Since we will freeze our versions for development with a compatible KF5 and > Plasma 5, there's no need for newer feature versions in the archive. We have > approximately a bazillion PPAs for people that want newer crack. We shouldn't > inflict it on the entire user base. There is a need for bugfixes, which unfortunately may or may not contain features. That being said, with frameworks being mostly libraries a 'feature' is a new function, which quite simply can not break existing functions by being there. C++ doesn't work like this. HS -- kubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
