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 Li
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 th
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 sta
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 t
On April 30, 2014 3:32:02 AM EDT, Mario Fux 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 fo
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 unsuppo
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 deliveri
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
>
On Tuesday 29 April 2014 21:54:17 Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On April 29, 2014 7:30:50 PM EDT, Albert Astals Cid 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
> >
> >wrote:
> >> >El Dimarts, 29
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 packagi
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 exa
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 12:23:51 Raymond Wooninck wrote:
> 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 no
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 hones
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" 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 will v
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 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 delive
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 fi
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 you
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 ha
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 c
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
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
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
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 amoun
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" 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 b
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 si
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) wo
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Raymond Wooninck 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 supporting only
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 s
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 on
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 delive
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) explai
41 matches
Mail list logo
