Hi all, Given that Plasma 5.13.5 has been released, and the 5.14.0 release is scheduled for October, I was wondering what decisions had been made regarding this issue?
Although not a Kubuntu developer, I would be keen to see the latest stable releases of Plasma and Qt available in a PPA. As an ex-system administrator, something along the lines of the approach outlined in option (b) makes sense to me. Regards, John On 22/05/18 11:52, Valorie Zimmerman wrote: > On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 1:12 AM, Rik Mills <[email protected]> wrote: >> Our default PPA policy for LTS releases states that [1] >> >> "Monthly KDE software release backports are made available through the >> Kubuntu PPA for as long as supported by the native LTS software stack >> but no longer than 2 years." >> >> For 16.04 LTS we allowed an upgrade of Qt in the backports PPA [2] from >> 5.5 to 5.6.x, however this was not altogether a radical decision as the >> Qt 5.6 release was a LTS one, and already being built and maintained by >> the Ubuntu phone/Qt team in their overlay PPA. >> >> For 18.04 LTS, we are already on Qt 5.9 LTS, with more point releases to >> come, hopefully as SRU updates to the main archive. >> >> Now Plasma 5.13 requires Qt => 5.10, so we need to discuss and decide an >> acceptable course of action, assuming that we wish to provide this and >> future updates update via a PPA to our users. >> >> Realistic options are IMO: >> >> (a) Provide updated Qt once again in our backports PPA, but make it >> quite clear that the level of support, both immediate an ongoing, if >> users choose to add that and upgrade will be limited by the fact that >> they are deliberately choosing to move off an LTS supported stack. > > I think that this is not a good idea for Bionic. > >> (b) Keep backports PPA building against Qt 5.9.x, and provide Plasma >> backports and other software dependant on newer non-LTS Qt in a separate >> more 'experimental' PPA. > > How about something like Plasma-Backports PPA? Make it clear, as you > say, that updating Qt and Plasma this way will mean hopping off the > LTS train. Having a regular Backports which allows LTS users to > upgrade applications and Plasma LTS is good. > >> (c) Something else? Comment welcome. >> >> For simplicity (a) is appealing, and more or less what users seem to be >> expecting us to do for them. (b) however has some advantages as it would >> perhaps allow users (say organisational ones) to upgrade to new KDE >> Applications releases (18.04, 18.08 etc) and others backports, without >> moving off LTS supported Qt, assuming future Apps are compatible. >> >> With Plasma 5.13 as few weeks away [3], and bugfix release to that which >> we would probably want to wait for before pushing to a not experimental >> location, not to mention getting Qt built, we have some thinking time. I >> would also note the decision will be tempered by practical and technical >> considerations the development team find while doing test builds, and >> evaluating the quality and stability of the non LTS Qt. >> >> Thank you. I look forward to comments. >> >> Rik Mills >> Kubuntu Council >> Kubuntu Developer >> >> [1] https://community.kde.org/Kubuntu/Policies#Long_Term_Support_.28LTS.29 >> [2] https://launchpad.net/~kubuntu-ppa/+archive/ubuntu/backports >> [3] https://community.kde.org/Schedules/Plasma_5 > > Thanks for asking! > > Valorie > -- kubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
