On dimanche 28 janvier 2018 00:32:09 CET Albert Astals Cid wrote: > El divendres, 26 de gener de 2018, a les 11:46:48 CET, Sandro Knauß va > > escriure: > > Hey, > > > > the question came up, what to do with 17.12.2 and 17.12.3 releases > > according KHoldidays. As you may know KHolidays has moved from KDEPim > > (Applications) to Frameworks and will be released within the next > > Frameworks release (5.43) too. So for 17.12.2 and 17.12.3 users can get > > kHolidays from both bundles. So what to do? > > We release them, we can't drop something in the middle of a stable release. > > > I think it is not an big issue shipping the KHolidays in both bundels. As > > frameworks is released from master and Applications has it own branch, we > > only need to make sure, that all bugfixes that are released for > > Applications are merged into master, but this is the default workflow > > anyways. If users already switched to Frameworks version, should > > following > > using Frameworks version and not switch back. For users not updated to > > Frameworks version can just follow using the version from Applications. > > > > So I would argue, that we should not do any special treating for KHolidays > > and just ship two months a nearly the same tarball in both bundles. > > > > It makes sense to add some lines to the next release announcement of > > 17.12.2 and next Frameworks release: > > > > KHolidays is moved from KDEPim (Applications) to Frameworks. We tried to > > not break your workflow. You have two options. Either you switch to > > Frameworks version and stick to it and do not build and use KHolidays > > from KDE Applications anymore. Or you continue using KHolidays from KDE > > Applications 17.12.X releases. The versions in Frameworks and Applications > > do only differ in some cleanup and the version number. In theory a smooth > > less switch should be possible without rebuilding depending packages as > > ABI > > is the same. We the KDEPim team (kde-...@kde.org, #kontact) also wants to > > move more packages from Applications to Frameworks in future. We are > > interested in your feedback, what can be improved to make it even more > > smoothless switch for the next packages. > > Do we really need that? Will users really understand that? Seems a bit too > much of "technical jargon" to me, and i know what we're talking about :D > > Since we think "it'll just work", why bother the user?
I suppose that's rather a message for the packagers than for the end users. -- David Faure, fa...@kde.org, http://www.davidfaure.fr Working on KDE Frameworks 5