RFC: kde stability proposal (redux)

[Arthur Pemberton]

On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 8:26 AM, Rex Dieter <rdieter at math.unl.edu> wrote:
> One more call for discussion around another proposal that came out of FUDCon
> Toronto.  Short version of this is that we'd consider slowing down updates a
> step, esp for the second half of a fedora release's lifetime, and to limit
> kde 4.x-type upgrades to at most 1 per release.
>
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE/Stability_Proposal


Just to go through the points

> More time for developers to work on making the current release stable and to work on the latest and greatest for Rawhide

Is there any middle ground between rawhide and updates?

> Lets users know in advance what to expect during a release cycle.

I'm don't understand how this change would accomplish that

> Will encourage users who want the latest and greatest to stay current with the Fedora releases.

Maybe I'm failing to comprehend this goal, but wanting the latest and
greatest seems contrary to the RFC's goal

> Will create some low hanging fruit in the way of backporting specific fixes into the older releases. These will be some good junior jobs that can be showcased to get new people onboard the KDE SIG, or to provide those already in the SIG but who are maybe not packagers a way to help.

I guess I should have read properly before asking my previous
question. Is creating new work really a goal to actively pursue?

> KDE updates often also need an updated Qt; for example updating to KDE 4.4 means that Qt has to be updated to 4.6. As more and more applications are written with Qt, pushing out Qt updates to older Fedora branches might destabilize a lot of non-KDE apps (or at least create maintainer burden).

I understand the issue here. Though I don't agree that a Fedora-KDE
based RFC should concern itself with this. This is Fedora, software is
expected to be very up to date.

-- 
Fedora 11
(www.pembo13.com)