On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 9:54 AM, David Faure fa...@kde.org wrote:
On Thursday 29 September 2011 20:01:00 Kevin Kofler wrote:
But one of my points is that we need features too, not just bugfixes.
Continuing 4.7.x releases solves the problem of bugfixes just fine, but
entirely fails to address
On Thursday 29 September 2011, Kevin Kofler wrote:
2. It will be confusing to our users, and even to some packagers, to have a
KDE SC 4.8 on kdelibs 4.7. The rule so far has always been that the kdelibs
version must be the same as the KDE SC version. Changing this will also
break all our
Am Samstag, 1. Oktober 2011, 08:27:02 schrieb Martin Gräßlin:
One of the main reasons for the rebranding was to realize that KDE is not
one product, but a community that produces multiple products among them a
desktop environment (Plasma). What you just try to tell us is that the
complete
Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
the features that got into the 4.7 branch to date have been things that
were already worked on before the Frameworks decision was made. it's was
an odd cas were features had been worked on while 4.7 was frozen with the
expectation of a 4.8 ... and that left us with the
Martin Gräßlin wrote:
One of the main reasons for the rebranding was to realize that KDE is
not one product, but a community that produces multiple products among
them a desktop environment (Plasma). What you just try to tell us is that
the complete rebranding is nonsense and we should go back
Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
so some features will indeed have to wait .. and that's not a horrible
thing because it means that frameworks will get more developer attention
and the attention it is getting already will not be slowed even further by
having to deal with bringing over features from 4.7.x
PS:
Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
the choice that packagers have is to actually work with us instead of
against us.
We would very much love to work with you. In fact, this is why I submitted
my patches to KDE ReviewBoard before even getting them into Rawhide. I
really WANT these to be upstream.
PPS:
I wrote:
However, working with you is only possible if you are also interested in
working with us, which implies listening to our needs, concerns and
wishes. By closing down the branch where our current development is
necessarily focused on since that's what we will be shipping in the
On Saturday, 1 de October de 2011 12:58:01 Kevin Kofler wrote:
(And I know that Qt is also breaking the ABI. That's something I also can't
agree with, especially considering that Qt 4 was advertised as the big ABI
break which will make new ABI breaks unnecessary for a very long time and
we've
On Saturday, October 01, 2011 08:27:02 AM Martin Gräßlin wrote:
On Saturday 01 October 2011 00:12:05 Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
Am Freitag, 30. September 2011, 10:07:27 schrieb Aaron J. Seigo:
will say Platform 4.7, Plasma
Workspaces 4.8 and application updates (or something along
On Thursday, September 29, 2011 18:11:12 Kevin Kofler wrote:
Wait and see the chaos that will come up when users open their Help/About in
Konqueror and it tells them that they're using Konqueror 4.8.0 under KDE
4.7.6. (And yes, it still says only KDE in 4.6.5, I haven't checked 4.7
or 4.8 for
On Thursday, September 29, 2011 23:57:53 Scott Kitterman wrote:
I don't like the fact that KDE developers decided to ignore their own policy
on maintenance updates. I think it breaks your contract with your
downstreams. In the case of what's been done so far, it doesn't have an
impact on us.
On Thursday, September 29, 2011 23:57:56 Kevin Kofler wrote:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/102175/
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/102291/
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/102350/
none of these are critical feature additions. they elevate the usability of
libplasma and are valuable,
On Thursday, September 29, 2011 14:01:50 Kevin Kofler wrote:
1. This puts kdelibs 4 into maintenance mode even before KDE Frameworks 5 is
anywhere near a release, let alone versions of the workspace and
applications actually using it. As a result, we will fail to deliver new
features to our
On Thursday 29 September 2011 14:01:50 Kevin Kofler wrote:
Hi,
as you probably already know, a decision was recently made that kdelibs 4.7
would be the last 4.x release series of kdelibs, and work would be ongoing
in the 5.0 (frameworks) and 4.7 (KDE/4.7) branches only. I think this is a
Hameleers al...@slackware.com
To: Wulf C. Krueger philant...@exherbo.org
Cc: kde-packa...@kde.org
Subject: Re: The case for a kdelibs 4.8
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011, Wulf C. Krueger wrote:
On 29.09.2011 14:01, Kevin Kofler wrote:
[Lots of excellent explanations deleted]
So I am urging you to reconsider
On Thursday, 2011-09-29, Rolf Eike Beer wrote:
The reason to stop master was (as far as I understand) to make the
frameworks branch easily to maintain. If someone is working on 4.8
(bugfixing, features) all this has to be ported to frameworks, too. So you
develop a moving target on a moving
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Aaron J. Seigo ase...@kde.org wrote:
On Thursday, September 29, 2011 14:01:50 Kevin Kofler wrote:
2. It will be confusing to our users, and even to some packagers, to have a
KDE SC 4.8 on kdelibs 4.7. The rule so far has always been that the kdelibs
version
On Thursday 29 September 2011 20:01:00 Kevin Kofler wrote:
But one of my points is that we need features too, not just bugfixes.
Continuing 4.7.x releases solves the problem of bugfixes just fine, but
entirely fails to address the issue of features.
But who is (or would be) working on features
On Donnerstag 29 September 2011 18:11:12 Kevin Kofler wrote:
Wait and see the chaos that will come up when users open their Help/About
in Konqueror and it tells them that they're using Konqueror 4.8.0 under
KDE 4.7.6. (And yes, it still says only KDE in 4.6.5, I haven't checked
4.7 or 4.8 for
On Friday, September 30, 2011 04:15:51 PM Markus Slopianka wrote:
(As a side note I also think that KDE Applications should completely lose
their version number and get date-based versioning because any application
can get major new features at any time – see Dolphin 2.0 in SC 4.8.)
Today,
On Thursday 29 September 2011, Andras Mantia wrote:
On Thursday, September 29, 2011 21:43:34 Stefan Majewsky wrote:
Without judging on the other arguments which look very reasonable to
me...
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at
wrote:
2. It will be
A Dijous, 29 de setembre de 2011, Scott Kitterman vàreu escriure:
On Thursday, September 29, 2011 11:47:22 PM Albert Astals Cid wrote:
A Dijous, 29 de setembre de 2011, Scott Kitterman vàreu escriure:
On Thursday, September 29, 2011 08:01:00 PM Kevin Kofler wrote:
On Thursday 29
A Divendres, 30 de setembre de 2011, Aaron J. Seigo vàreu escriure:
On Thursday, September 29, 2011 23:57:56 Kevin Kofler wrote:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/102175/
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/102291/
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/102350/
none of these are critical
A Divendres, 30 de setembre de 2011, Alexander Neundorf vàreu escriure:
On Thursday 29 September 2011, Andras Mantia wrote:
On Thursday, September 29, 2011 21:43:34 Stefan Majewsky wrote:
Without judging on the other arguments which look very reasonable to
me...
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at
Am Freitag, 30. September 2011, 10:07:27 schrieb Aaron J. Seigo:
will say Platform 4.7, Plasma
Workspaces 4.8 and application updates (or something along those lines).
that was not just a marketing ploy, but an attempt to align our public
communication with the realities that already existed
For example, when we switched our default
spell checker in Fedora from aspell to hunspell in Fedora 9 (i.e. 4.0
era), I
had to add support for hunspell to kdelibs3, or our users would have had
to
install 2 spell checkers to use KDE apps! (Even several apps in the
default
KDE installation
On Donnerstag 29 September 2011 14:01:50 Kevin Kofler wrote:
2. It will be confusing to our users, and even to some packagers, to have a
KDE SC 4.8 on kdelibs 4.7.
Since almost exactly 2 years we (esp. the promo team) are communicating that
Platform/Frameworks, Applications and Workspaces are
Rolf Eike Beer wrote:
(re the support for spellchecking with hunspell)
Given that it is now proven and tested code, who stops you committing it
into KDE/3.5 branch?
What for? There are no plans to do a 3.5.11 or 3.6.0 release, ever, and the
one major distribution known to sometimes ship
On Thursday, September 29, 2011 03:27:58 PM Markus Slopianka wrote:
On Donnerstag 29 September 2011 14:01:50 Kevin Kofler wrote:
2. It will be confusing to our users, and even to some packagers, to
have a KDE SC 4.8 on kdelibs 4.7.
Since almost exactly 2 years we (esp. the promo team) are
Markus Slopianka wrote:
On Donnerstag 29 September 2011 14:01:50 Kevin Kofler wrote:
2. It will be confusing to our users, and even to some packagers, to have
a KDE SC 4.8 on kdelibs 4.7.
Since almost exactly 2 years we (esp. the promo team) are communicating
that Platform/Frameworks,
Scott Kitterman wrote:
We did this in Kubuntu and it was confusing. It was also technically
challenging. Speaking as someone investing a lot of time in trying to do
a high quality job of distributing KDE to end users: Please. Never, ever,
do this to us again.
+1
The transition from
On Thursday 29 September 2011, Heinz Wiesinger wrote:
From what I remember from the desktop summit the picture you draw here is
quite an exaggeration of what is actually happening.
kdelibs 4.7 is meant to be frozen for new features, but not for bugfixes.
Bugfix releases of kdelibs-4.7
On Thursday 29 September 2011, Kevin Kofler wrote:
On Thursday 29 September 2011, Heinz Wiesinger wrote:
...
The KDE Frameworks 5.0 development is not meant to take forever. In fact
I think it's meant to be finished around early 2012, which would leave
us with a frozen kdelibs for one KDE
Without judging on the other arguments which look very reasonable to me...
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
2. It will be confusing to our users, and even to some packagers, to have a
KDE SC 4.8 on kdelibs 4.7. [...]
...what exactly stops you from
On Thursday, September 29, 2011 21:43:34 Stefan Majewsky wrote:
Without judging on the other arguments which look very reasonable to
me...
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at
wrote:
2. It will be confusing to our users, and even to some packagers, to
have a
A Dijous, 29 de setembre de 2011, Kevin Kofler vàreu escriure:
Hi,
as you probably already know, a decision was recently made that kdelibs 4.7
would be the last 4.x release series of kdelibs, and work would be ongoing
in the 5.0 (frameworks) and 4.7 (KDE/4.7) branches only. I think this is a
A Dijous, 29 de setembre de 2011, Scott Kitterman vàreu escriure:
On Thursday, September 29, 2011 08:01:00 PM Kevin Kofler wrote:
On Thursday 29 September 2011, Heinz Wiesinger wrote:
From what I remember from the desktop summit the picture you draw
here
is
quite an exaggeration of
A Dijous, 29 de setembre de 2011, Andras Mantia vàreu escriure:
On Thursday, September 29, 2011 21:43:34 Stefan Majewsky wrote:
Without judging on the other arguments which look very reasonable to
me...
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at
wrote:
2. It
On Thursday, September 29, 2011 11:47:22 PM Albert Astals Cid wrote:
A Dijous, 29 de setembre de 2011, Scott Kitterman vàreu escriure:
On Thursday, September 29, 2011 08:01:00 PM Kevin Kofler wrote:
On Thursday 29 September 2011, Heinz Wiesinger wrote:
From what I remember from the
On Thursday, September 29, 2011 11:47:55 PM Albert Astals Cid wrote:
...
That is actually Dirk's plan (or at least that is what i remember from the
Release Team BoF in Berlin).
...
Are the results of this BoF published anywhere?
Scott K
41 matches
Mail list logo
