Personally I think it would be nice to have
86f988434cd657e77cc9429e78f7290ce6b5713d since otherwise LTS Plasma
users will be hitting it for the next few years.
---
On another note, I have to admit I'm starting to doubt how well our LTS
Plasma product works without a corresponding LTS frameworks release to
support it. We can fix bugs in software that uses the Plasma release
schedule till the cows come home, but if the bug is in Frameworks, users
are stuck with it forever since LTS distros don't typically ship new
Frameworks releases.
Yes yes, they should, and all that--but they don't.
It seems like we either need to:
- Work on convincing these distros to ship Frameworks versions in a
rolling manner to their LTS users
- Provide an LTS Frameworks product that can receive bugfixes and get
point releases, to support the Plasma LTS product
- Stop misleadingly offering a Plasma LTS product, since everything in
it that comes from Frameworks isn't actually LTS
Nate
On 2020-02-12 05:39, Marco Martin wrote:
On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 12:56 PM David Faure <[email protected]> wrote:
On mercredi 12 février 2020 12:48:48 CET you wrote:
Hi David,
me again, sorry :/
there seem to have been 2 regressions in kirigami 5.67 which are
affecting the lts release of plasma in a quite user visible way
fixes for them are
86f988434cd657e77cc9429e78f7290ce6b5713d
and
f695cde36a6829b8b92b2fd82deff16d9385fcb9
And which regressions will these commits create themselves? :-)
Ah, wait: f695cde36a6829b8b92b2fd82deff16d9385fcb9 was already
included in 5.67.1,
I didn't notice that, my bad.
The other one is for https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=417351 which
is rather subtle/not often happening.
So, I'm ok to go on the safe side and not release a v5.67.2.
--
Marco Martin
