On Wednesday, February 02, 2011 11:26:10 Boudewijn Rempt wrote: > On Wednesday 02 February 2011, Inge Wallin wrote: > > I may have misunderstood, but if I understood correctly I'm very sorry to > > have to say that I hate this. The reason is that it is a > > developer-centric way to work rather than a user-centric. > > > > I'm sure it will be very ego-boosting for us developers to get new > > versions with new fancy features out there as soon as possible. > > > > But as a user, I expect to be able to update to either a new version with > > new features and possibly also new bugs *or* a more stable release with > > no new features but also definitely less bugs. > > > > If this is the way that we will do things, then the user will live in a > > state of perpetually changing set of bugs and more or less well-working > > new features. > > > > For a short time, until we reach something like a big enough feature set > > that a real organization can use it, then perhaps this could be a way > > forward. But I know that admins at larger installations prefer > > stability much before new features. And stability is what will suffer > > with this scheme. > > But we don't have that sort of users at all -- there are no admins with big > installations of koffice or calligra.
While this is true, the Linux distros work the same way. I think we should ask the packagers first what they think of the idea. > We don't have the kind of users who > value stability over experimentation, since there hasn't been an end-user > release of KOffice since 2007. The only app with something approaching a > userbase is Krita, and there the users are all for having the > possibilities they ask for in their hands as soon as possible. > What we do have is an opportunity to show that there is progress because we > are in a situation where master is no longer unstable like trunk used to > be, but can be kept quite stable, while still receiving new features on a > regular basis. > > And in the end, having frequent snapshot releases _is_ a stopgap until we > reach the release scheme Cyrille proposed: four releases a year, of which > one gets bug fixes for a longer period. Good! I didn't see this in the original suggestion, though. Hence my objections. I dislike it a little bit less now. :-) Do you have any thoughts on when to interrupt this scheme and go to X releases per year (4 is not yet decided)? _______________________________________________ calligra-devel mailing list calligra-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/calligra-devel
