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-de...@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
