On Tuesday 29 April 2014 23:20:21 Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote:
The result will be that we will need to freeze at some point and do our best
to keep up with patches for stable releases. Or maybe even drop KF5 for
stable releases :-/
While I don't share the fatalistic point of
Am Mittwoch, 30. April 2014, 04.20:21 schrieb Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez
Meyer:
Morning
For Ubuntu I can use the Firefox example. So can you explain why is KF5
different than firefox?
Firefox (and Chromium too) are handled like no other packages in the
archive. It's the best
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 10:17:23 Sune Vuorela wrote:
On Tuesday 29 April 2014 23:20:21 Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote:
The result will be that we will need to freeze at some point and do our
best to keep up with patches for stable releases. Or maybe even drop KF5
for stable
Am Mittwoch, 30. April 2014, 10:17:23 schrieb Sune Vuorela:
So quite many users will end up using patched-up versions of KF5
if every distro has its own patched version, bug reporting and
fixing will get much more difficult.
Where should a bug be reported? The only logical choice seems to
be
On April 30, 2014 3:32:02 AM EDT, Mario Fux kde...@unormal.org wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 30. April 2014, 04.20:21 schrieb Lisandro Damián Nicanor
Pérez
Meyer:
Morning
For Ubuntu I can use the Firefox example. So can you explain why
is KF5
different than firefox?
Firefox (and Chromium too)
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 10:41:30 Raymond Wooninck wrote:
For openSUSE it will definitely bring problems as that we wouldn't be able
to release any maintenance updates anymore for the KDE Desktop with this
Release Cycle. As Sune indicated, if KF5 is updated then the other
components like
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
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 05:24:55 Scott Kitterman wrote:
Since we release on a different schedule, with monthly KF5 releases, we'd
all be interested in supporting different releases.
Which is already the case, I mentioned in another reply that Opensuse has had
releases with X.X.5 (so
On Wednesday 30 April 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
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 11:28:26 Àlex Fiestas wrote:
Having a release every month will allow distributions to package fresher
versions of frameworks since we will virtually remove the synchronization
problem.
As an example, Opensuse released 13.1 with KDE 4.8.5 iirc, which already had
no
On Tuesday 29 April 2014 21:54:17 Scott Kitterman wrote:
On April 29, 2014 7:30:50 PM EDT, Albert Astals Cid aa...@kde.org wrote:
El Dimarts, 29 d'abril de 2014, a les 19:23:07, Scott Kitterman va
escriure:
On April 29, 2014 2:07:52 PM EDT, Albert Astals Cid aa...@kde.org
wrote:
El
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 12:15:34 Àlex Fiestas wrote:
Not really, the plan is the following:
Update frameworks all the times since it will make everybody life easier and
will improve quality (we strongly believe that, if not we wouldn't do it).
A non rolling-distro can do this without
Martin Gräßlin wrote:
Hello Martin,
Actually I think there is nothing wrong with having something like an
LTS release which is maintained by the distros. I recently read that
This is going to be difficult, to be honest. I can't speak for other distros
but in openSUSE *all* the KDE packaging
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 12:04:15 Raymond Wooninck wrote:
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 11:28:26 Àlex Fiestas wrote:
Having a release every month will allow distributions to package fresher
versions of frameworks since we will virtually remove the synchronization
problem.
As an example,
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 12:20:51 Luca Beltrame wrote:
Martin Gräßlin wrote:
Hello Martin,
Actually I think there is nothing wrong with having something like an
LTS release which is maintained by the distros. I recently read that
This is going to be difficult, to be honest. I can't
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 12:33:06 Àlex Fiestas wrote:
We are all on the same situation and we have to make the best of it. We
believe that e can do best if we focus on master and make sure master rocks,
it has no regressions etc.
Obviously, if we are able to increase the quality of overall
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 12:26:14 Àlex Fiestas wrote:
Here you have the link to the release that released with an almost out of
support version:
https://en.opensuse.org/Archive:Features_12.2#KDE_Plasma_Workspaces
As you can see, the link shows the features of OpenSuse 12.2 featuring
On April 30, 2014 6:26:14 AM EDT, Àlex Fiestas afies...@kde.org wrote:
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 12:04:15 Raymond Wooninck wrote:
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 11:28:26 Àlex Fiestas wrote:
Having a release every month will allow distributions to package
fresher
versions of frameworks since we
On Wednesday, April 30, 2014 12:15:34 Àlex Fiestas wrote:
On Tuesday 29 April 2014 21:54:17 Scott Kitterman wrote:
On April 29, 2014 7:30:50 PM EDT, Albert Astals Cid aa...@kde.org wrote:
El Dimarts, 29 d'abril de 2014, a les 19:23:07, Scott Kitterman va
escriure:
On April 29, 2014
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
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 08:24:43 Scott Kitterman 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
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 14:39:31 Martin Gräßlin wrote:
I know that this is a change from how it is right now: but wouldn't it be
better if those who are interested do these branches? Let's face it whatever
we do upstream cannot suite all of our downstreams at the same time.
If I take your
On Wednesday, April 30, 2014 14:39:31 Martin Gräßlin wrote:
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 08:24:43 Scott Kitterman 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
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 15:08:55 Raymond Wooninck wrote:
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 14:39:31 Martin Gräßlin wrote:
I know that this is a change from how it is right now: but wouldn't it be
better if those who are interested do these branches? Let's face it
whatever we do upstream cannot
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 08:16:48 Scott Kitterman wrote:
I get what you're asking for.
What I'm trying to make clear is you aren't going to get it.
Well, I'd say we try.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 07:50:02 Scott Kitterman wrote:
The difference is that you will do proper testing with all the QA in
place on
each distros, we don't have such thing upstream beyond the tests.
As for the mess, each distro picks their version as you said and you
(as in
distros)
Àlex Fiestas wrote:
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 12:20:51 Luca Beltrame wrote:
[snip]
As for Frameworks, we have ~20 maintainers for ~60 frameworks, and most of
them are not paid to work on it either.
We are all on the same situation and we have to make the best of it. We
believe that e can
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 13:44:50 Raymond Wooninck wrote:
So, you will not simply update to 4.14.X but instead do cherry-picking of
the bug fixes? Because that would be the same with Frameworks.
You got that one wrong :) We push the 4.14.x release as a full maintenance
update. So if
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 11:00:39 Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote:
This is a point in which I fully agree, and even if it doesn't solves any of
the things we are discussing it's good to acknowledge: we are very low on
man power, both upstream and most of us dowstreamers.
The amount
Hi,
(Disclaimer: I'm not a KDE packager, just a user and an occasional
contributor)
It is, you (as in opensuse) just have to get over the drama of having small
features in on each release.
Let's try to analyze a bit why some distros have this panic to new versions
containing features
On April 30, 2014 9:56:30 AM EDT, Àlex Fiestas afies...@kde.org wrote:
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 07:50:02 Scott Kitterman wrote:
The difference is that you will do proper testing with all the QA in
place on
each distros, we don't have such thing upstream beyond the tests.
As for the mess,
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 16:22:43 Ralf Jung wrote:
Hi,
(Disclaimer: I'm not a KDE packager, just a user and an occasional
contributor)
It is, you (as in opensuse) just have to get over the drama of having
small
features in on each release.
Let's try to analyze a bit why some
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 17:24:42 Àlex Fiestas wrote:
This is a problem that already exists, for example in bluedevil I have had
enormous problems because distros would have either an ancient version or a
git snapshot.
I was already waiting for this story to re-appear again.
Current
On Wednesday 30 of April 2014 17:24:42 Àlex Fiestas wrote:
...
So with frameworks I think we can compromise with something like last 5
releases and turn off auto reporting for anything older than that (this
is just an example).
This essentially means distros (non-rolling ones at least) would
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Raymond Wooninck tittiatc...@gmail.com wrote:
So with frameworks I think we can compromise with something like last 5
releases and turn off auto reporting for anything older than that (this
is just an example).
So in other words, this means that you are
On Wednesday, April 30, 2014 10:17:23 Sune Vuorela wrote:
On Tuesday 29 April 2014 23:20:21 Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote:
The result will be that we will need to freeze at some point and do our
best to keep up with patches for stable releases. Or maybe even drop KF5
for stable
On Wednesday, April 30, 2014 15:51:56 Àlex Fiestas wrote:
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 13:44:50 Raymond Wooninck wrote:
So, you will not simply update to 4.14.X but instead do cherry-picking
of
the bug fixes? Because that would be the same with Frameworks.
You got that one wrong :)
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
On Wed, April 30, 2014 11:28:26 Àlex Fiestas wrote:
As for the backporting, you could use bugzilla (even via api) to get a list
of everything that has been fixed, get the SHA and backport it
automatically, that will ease a lot the process.
Is there any reason we can't do this? Even if it's a
On Wed, April 30, 2014 15:51:56 Àlex Fiestas wrote:
So, I understand that for big releases you wouldn't trust us on no
regressions, but please take into account that these releases will be a
completely different monster.
Finally, could you (or any packager with similar concerns) explain to
40 matches
Mail list logo
