On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 7:55 AM, David Jarvie <djar...@kde.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 16 September 2016 11:55:50 BST, Jonathan Riddell <j...@jriddell.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 10:52:32PM +1200, Ben Cooksley wrote:
>>>
>>>  It seems that KDE PIM, despite being part of the Applications release,
>>>  doesn't align it's internal version numbers with the rest of the
>>>  Applications release.
>>>
>>>  This causes issues - as we've received complaints about various
>>>  products (all being PIM products) missing versions on bugs.kde.org,
>>>  due to this mismatch. It's also confusing for users.
>>>
>>>  Can PIM please fall in line with the rest of Applications?
>>
>>
>> This is common across lots of apps in Applications.  e.g. Umbrello is at
>> 2.20.99 internally.  It's always been the case.
>>
>> Jonathan
>>
>
> This idea was discussed a year or two ago, and it was agreed then that
> applications would keep their own version numbering, if desired.
>
> The KDE Applications version is simply a date indication. It's very useful,
> for developers who want it, to be able to have an individual application
> version which has a meaning in functional terms.
>
> I strongly disagree with this proposal to change version numbers.

Unfortunately all it leads to is user confusion as to what they've
actually installed.

>From their perspective their distribution shipped them Applications
15.10 (as that will be what the release notes say) yet when they got
to report a bug they won't find those version numbers. Also, these
versions have already been added on Bugzilla, so the confusion is
present amongst our own developers as well.

>From my perspective, this discord should be eliminated by harmonizing
the version numbers.

>
> --
> David Jarvie
> KAlarm author, KDE developer
> http://www.astrojar.org.uk/kalarm

Regards,
Ben

Reply via email to