On April 30, 2014 3:32:02 AM EDT, Mario Fux <kde...@unormal.org> wrote: >Am Mittwoch, 30. April 2014, 04.20:21 schrieb Lisandro Damián Nicanor >Pérez >Meyer: > >Morning > >> > >For Ubuntu I can use the Firefox example. So can you explain why >is KF5 >> > >different than firefox? >> > >> > Firefox (and Chromium too) are handled like no other packages in >the >> > archive. It's the best known (to average computer users) FOSS >brand. >> > There's not much choice but to ship it and given the combination of >> > library bundling and the presence of security fixes in essentially >every >> > release there's no realistic choice but to eat releases whole >(despite >> > viewing the necessity as being highly distasteful). Canonical has >also >> > funded significant engineering resources to maintain Ubuntu Firefox >> > packages and do extensive regression testing. >> > >> > None of the above is relevant to KF5. >> > >> > If I were to ask for the kind of update policy Ubuntu has for >Firefox, I >> > am pretty sure it would get laughed out of the room. I've gotten >> > exceptions approved for quite a number of packages, so I think I >have a >> > reasonable basis to form an opinion on what's likely to be >approved. >> > >> > The KF5 plan amounts to "Non-rolling distros: you're on your own." >> >> Debian will be in the exact same position. Firefox and Chromium are >just >> good examples of what to do to get your downstream unhappy and get >your >> users non- stable experiences. >> >> The result will be that we will need to freeze at some point and do >our >> best to keep up with patches for stable releases. Or maybe even drop >KF5 >> for stable releases :-/ >> >> I don't know how other major distros with focus in stability work, >but I >> think they will be more or less in the same position (I'm thinking in >Red >> Hat, Centos, Suse and others here, but I might be wrong). > >I might be to naive but what about something like an LTS for KF5. A >branch >where all the distros and some KF5 hackers backports fixes and promise >to do >this for 1, 2 or more years? I even think that other people and groups >could >be interested in this as e.g. Calligra who seems historically to be >more >conservative about kdelibs/KF5 minimum requirements... > >I see Kevin's arguments and the ones of the distros. So maybe finding a >middle >ground?
Since we release on a different schedule, with monthly KF5 releases, we'd all be interested in supporting different releases. I don't know what the Plasma release schedule/plan is. Perhaps if they're on a longer cycle and can declare up front what KF5 version they are targeting, we could all aim at that? Scott K _______________________________________________ release-team mailing list release-team@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team