On May 4, 2014 4:25:25 AM EDT, Martin Graesslin <mgraess...@kde.org> wrote: >On Wednesday 30 April 2014 21:56:12 Alexander Neundorf wrote: >> On Wednesday, April 30, 2014 11:35:54 Àlex Fiestas wrote: >> > On Tuesday 29 April 2014 19:23:07 Scott Kitterman wrote: >> > > For non-rolling distros, at some point you have to stop and >release. A >> > > mix >> > > of new features and bug fixes aren't going to be allowed in. >> > > >> > > We (Kubuntu) have been delivering KDE SC point releases as >post-release >> > > updates to our users for most (maybe all) KDE4 releases. That's >over >> > > with >> > > KF5. >> > > >> > > We'll, I guess, have to settle for cherry picking fixes and doing >our >> > > best. >> > >> > You might not know this but most developers don't do proper testing >in the >> > stable branches because the cost of having master and stable >environments >> > and doing testing in both branches for each fix is too much, we >simply >> > don't have the manpower for that. >> > >> > History has shown this maaaany times, we have done point releases >that >> > were >> > horrible quality-wise because nobody was testing them. The stable >branches >> > have virtually no users. >> >> maybe not among developers... >> But all normal users who just install KDE from some distro are users >of the >> stable branches. > >I think Alex meant something different: the branch does not have any >testers >before it's rolled to the users. Which means that regressions are not >caught >before they hit the users.
At least for Kubuntu, the amount of upstream testing is well understood. We do a fair amount of testing before releasing to our end users. More upstream testing would, of course, be lovely, but I don't see the current situation as particularly problematic. From my point of view, point releases are very much tested before being released to end users. Scott K _______________________________________________ release-team mailing list release-team@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team