Hi dear comrades On 16 January 2014 10:02, Harald Sitter <apachelog...@ubuntu.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 6:49 AM, Rohan Garg <rohang...@kubuntu.org> wrote: >>> > (if our primary concern are low quality reviews that do not bother to >>> > install/upgrade, then I guess 4.12 would be the way to go :P) >>> >> >> My main concern are things not working out of the box in the KDE 4.13 RC ( as >> is often the case with RC's as witnessed in earlier KDE SC releases ). > > To be honest with half the essential bits frozen (workspace/libs) this > seems less likely. > > The thing is, if the *RC* turns out to have problems we still have > time to fix that. As Jonathan pointed out, final actually is due for > tagging a week before release (i.e. before our final release freeze), > so all the fixes are supposedly available upstream before we freeze > and we could manually patch the RC to 4.13 final levels if need be. At > the same time we do have time to do a complete u-turn and revert back > to SC 4.12 (I'll go ahead and say that this would not take more than a > week, then again we have no precedence ^^). > > So yeah, 4.13(rc) can cause quality problems. However I am counting on > our new QC measures to prevent us from releasing a troubled final and > we certainly have just enough time to fix any show-stoppers that > appear in 4.13rc. > >> KDE SC >> 4.13 will also feature a new search framework, and some applications like >> Amarok are likely not to be ported by that time. So we're left in the weird >> situation where we will have Nepomuk and Baloo on the ISO. >> >> Ofcourse, we could just drop Nepomuk from the ISO and then we leave it up to >> the users to install Nepomuk to get required meta data integration in Amarok. >> But IMHO that constitutes as loss of out of the box features from previous >> releases. > > I guess that's a non-issue as per Myriam's mail. Unless there are > other application using nepomuk outside the SC ( bangarang comes to > mind, but we don't have that on the ISO - and I am not sure it is > maintained still). > Actually, Jonathan, what does upstream think about this? Are they > confident that we'll have reasonable quality by RC time? > >> Overall it seems a bit risky to push for a RC in a LTS release. If we're >> worried about support, It's not like we have a proper definition for a >> Kubuntu >> LTS release ;) > > I'll argue that it is in fact less risky because it is LTS. LTS, quite > unlike all other releases, get their ISO respun ever so often. Going > by 12.04's example we'd have a 14.04.1 in August, containing KDE SC > 4.13.3+. > Personally I am not worried about support, I just believe that having > a newer version for a product that will be relevant for the next 6 > years seems more reasonable. > > If things go wrong we'd look at ~4months with a possibly grave issue > and then 68 months of a high quality release. Which all in all does > sound rather reasonable to be honest :P > > HS > > -- > kubuntu-devel mailing list > kubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
>From my POV, we should try to go with .13 but be prepared for issues (even if they're unlikely). -- Tm_T, Jussi Kekkonen Ubuntu/KDE developer t...@ubuntu.com -- kubuntu-devel mailing list kubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel