On lunedì 31 luglio 2017 23:00:37 CEST, Albert Astals Cid wrote:
El dilluns, 31 de juliol de 2017, a les 12:19:48 CEST, Elvis Angelaccio va
escriure:
Hi all,
I'd like to discuss whether we can make the next Applications release an
LTS release. What would be needed from a practical point of view? (changes
to release/i18n scripts, etc.?)
About the schedule, I think we could release the LTS tarballs
the same day ...
What you need is buy-in from developers not from releasers, if developers
agree this is a good idea, we sure can try to make this happen.
That's what I hoped to hear, thanks. I agree we need to be sure we actually
*want* to do an LTS, but I asked here first because I wanted to be sure we
*can*.
But since you came to the release-team i'll give you my
part-of-release-team-
opinion anyway :D
I don't think it will work, and what we will have is something
we call LTS but
we don't really get much fixes in anyway.
If you look at the bugfixes in .MICRO releases, they are usually decreasing
17.04.1 - ~20
17.04.2 - ~15
17.04.3 - ~25 <-- exception
16.12.1 - ~40
16.12.2 - ~20
16.12.3 - ~20
16.08.1 - ~45
16.08.2 - ~30
16.08.3 - ~20
16.04.1 - ~25
16.04.2 - ~25
16.04.3 - ~20
15.12.1 - ~30
15.12.2 - ~30
15.12.3 - ~15
There may be several reasons for that:
* We actually fix all the bugs so there's fewer to fix for .3 (unlikely :D)
* Developers forget there's a stable branch or if there's
going to be another
release of it so juts code the fix in master anyway (we know
that people are
kind of bad remembering the schedule)
* After N months, code in stable diverges from master enough
that developers
only fix bugs in master since the pain of having to code the
fix twice is too
high.
And that is my developer-opinion, fixing bugs in a stable branch is often
painful but doable, but having a LTS that branched long time
ago is no fun at
all.
This is something that companies (i.e. Red Hat et al) ask a lot
of money for,
exactly because of that, because it's not fun and because it's hard to make
sure the patch even if it may apply, fixes the same thing in the same way
without any side effect.
In my opinion this is something we should not be doing and I
don't think it's
a good investment of our developer-time, but who am I to say what our
developers should be working? So again, goto first line, and
try to convince
the developers, not the releasers :)
Very good points which we should properly discuss on kde-devel. I'll start
another thread there.
Good luck,
Albert
Cheers,
Elvis
