On 2008-09-11, Dirk Mueller wrote:
> ...
> I think what is missing here is regular snapshots of things that should be
> used for /trunk development, and a timeline on when they're required (e.g.
> only on mondays).
I the mean time, until a thorough policy is fleshed out, would it
be possible to
On Tuesday 09 September 2008, Allen Winter wrote:
> I think we do a terrible job
I don't think thats the case. We can do better though. The past problems were
a) the job owner was not defined, so in the end nobody did anything
b) there is no clear notification procedure (who needs to be notified
On Monday 08 September 2008, Tom Albers wrote:
> In rescheduling the 4.2 release, it seems we missed the fact that by moving
> the schedule forward, we can no longer depend on Qt 4.5. I wonder if that
> is the right thing to do. What would be the disadvantage to revert this
> change (besides me lo
On Sunday 07 September 2008, Allen Winter wrote:
> > development branch of Eigen be a place where we can experiment and
> > break stuff without affecting our users. So, I support your plan.
> There seems to be another set of kdesupport developers who
> rely on the KDE folks to help test their stuf
On Tuesday 26 August 2008, Michael Pyne wrote:
> Well what I was thinking is we could make a kdesupport 4.1 branch for
> instance to do the same thing. (unless you mean kdesupport-stable which
> simply tracks the latest stable release of KDE).
It doesn't make sense to me - the software in kdesupp
On Saturday 06 September 2008, Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> > Because KDAB does real development with real QA in the enterprise3
> > branch. And for the 3.5 branch people mostly just throw patches over the
> > wall and assume they work, with no testing at all.
> So having 3.5 branch and enterprise co
On Tuesday 09 September 2008, Allen Winter wrote:
> Howdy,
>
> I think we do a terrible job of keeping the community informed about
> approaching milestones.
>
> Let's brainstorm about ways we can provide consistent, timely
> reminders/nags. The KDE community should except on-time notifications in
On 9/9/08, Aaron J. Seigo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> unless we have a plan for that CSV file in place, including someone to do the
> work of parsing it into other formats, i'd suggest we don't put one up online.
> the danger of putting a CSV (or any other) file up without a sound plan first
> is
On Wednesday 10 September 2008 01:46:13 Helio Chissini de Castro wrote:
> I'm fail to see benefits in terms that our primary visible users are
> distros. Doesn't matter when or how we decide launch, will be in the middle
> of schedule of some of then. So unless we decide benefit one distro, which
>
