On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 5:06 AM, Olav Vitters <o...@vitters.nl> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 05:52:06PM +0200, Samuel Verschelde wrote: >> Le vendredi 30 septembre 2011 15:00:45, Olav Vitters a écrit : >> > On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 09:33:59PM +0200, Samuel Verschelde wrote: >> > > However, how great is GNOME 3.4 going to be as compared to 3.2.2 ? :) >> > >> > For me it is multiple things: >> > 1. More stable; The more people use a recent version of GNOME, more >> > fixes will go into GNOME and long term GNOME is more stable >> > >> > Basically: if your GNOME version is old, developers spend less time >> > on it, because they assume the issue is probably fixed. So, IMO, to >> > ensure GNOME stays at a high quality, you have to provide a recent >> > version... staying 1 version behind only works for short term (the >> > "Release early, release often" mindset). >> >> Did I misunderstand , or is GNOME 3.2 not going to have any fixes after >> 3.2.2, >> although 3.4 will still not be ready at that time, leaving users with several >> months without any fixes ? I would understand that 3.2 would stop being >> supported a few months after 3.4 is out, but if really support stops >> *before*, >> that's puzzling :) > > Nothing new, has been like this for various releases. We did use to do a > .3 release, but it takes quite a lot of time to do that, and we didn't > see the benefit. No distro also complained to GNOME for the lack of a .3 > release. > > Note that it only relates to whole of GNOME, if a maintainer wants to > make another release, they're free to do so. Most do not though, but > some do. > >> For small projects, I can understand that developers always want to you to >> use >> the latest (lastest stable version at least), but for bigger projects such as >> a DE, I would find it surprising. We all know that once a major version has >> been released, it will have users for years. > > I think you're getting the intention wrong. GNOME 3.2 is a bugfix for > 3.0; 3.4 is a bugfix for 3.2. If distributions want to rely on an older > version, that is nice, but as it is their choice.
i think 3.4 would be a nice choice ut as told it depends of the schedule. If you think this can be ok, i trust you. Is it doable to do like mikala for kde and do updates for gnome 3.4.x during mageia lifecycle ?