On Saturday, February 01, 2014 19:33:31 Michael Jansen wrote:
> > > > And as already discussed using the date of the final release in
> > > > pre-releases is dangerous.
> > >
> > > Whatever you guys decide to use. It would be nice if it would be
> > > compatible to
> > >
> > > http://semver.org/
>
> > >
> > > And as already discussed using the date of the final release in
> > > pre-releases is dangerous.
> >
> > Whatever you guys decide to use. It would be nice if it would be
> > compatible
> > to
> >
> > http://semver.org/
> >
> > This is the only attempt to standardize versions i know
On Saturday 01 February 2014 15:19:57 Michael Jansen wrote:
> On Tuesday 28 January 2014 12:06:27 Martin Gräßlin wrote:
> > On Tuesday 28 January 2014 11:50:34 Martin Klapetek wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Martin Gräßlin
>
> wrote:
> > > > What we should consider when using such a
On Tuesday 28 January 2014 12:06:27 Martin Gräßlin wrote:
> On Tuesday 28 January 2014 11:50:34 Martin Klapetek wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Martin Gräßlin
wrote:
> > > What we should consider when using such a numbering scheme is that it
> > > also
> > > works with beta releases o
On Tuesday 28 January 2014 11:50:34 Martin Klapetek wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Martin Gräßlin wrote:
> > What we should consider when using such a numbering scheme is that it also
> > works with beta releases of Plasma Next. If we kind of stick to what we
> > use
> > today it could
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Martin Gräßlin wrote:
>
> What we should consider when using such a numbering scheme is that it also
> works with beta releases of Plasma Next. If we kind of stick to what we use
> today it could be.
> 2014.06-90 for the beta release of Plasma Next with the last s
On Monday 27 January 2014 21:45:48 Daniel Nicoletti wrote:
> 2014-01-27 Albert Astals Cid :
> > El Dilluns, 27 de gener de 2014, a les 15:05:43, Jos Poortvliet va
escriure:
> >> I recall seeing -x often as distro-package-versions, so 2014.06.2 might
> >> be
> >> better. Then the fourth packaging o
2014-01-27 Albert Astals Cid :
> El Dilluns, 27 de gener de 2014, a les 15:05:43, Jos Poortvliet va escriure:
>> I recall seeing -x often as distro-package-versions, so 2014.06.2 might be
>> better. Then the fourth packaging of 2014.06.2 will be 2014.06.2-4.
>
> Just after reading the email I also
El Dilluns, 27 de gener de 2014, a les 15:05:43, Jos Poortvliet va escriure:
> On Monday 27 January 2014 14:37:03 Martin Klapetek wrote:
> > Hey all,
> >
> > I've processed the discussion in the previous thread, we discussed it a
> > bit
> > in today's Plasma Monday hangout and here is a reiterati
On Monday, January 27, 2014 15:30:09 Martin Gräßlin wrote:
> I remember several cases where we had issues which were not large enough to
> stop the rolling of all of KDE SC, but there were certainly enough issues
> which should have stopped a Plasma release. So I do hope that we use this
> chance
On Monday 27 January 2014 15:14:46 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> On Monday, January 27, 2014 15:05:43 Jos Poortvliet wrote:
> > > * Inside Plasma team, we'll start referring to the next version simply
> > > as
> > >
> > > "Plasma Next". This will always be the "next major version to be
> > > release
On Monday, January 27, 2014 15:05:43 Jos Poortvliet wrote:
> > * Inside Plasma team, we'll start referring to the next version simply as
> >
> > "Plasma Next". This will always be the "next major version to be
> > released".
> > We encourage everyone to start using "Plasma Next", we don't want thi
On Monday 27 January 2014 14:37:03 Martin Klapetek wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> I've processed the discussion in the previous thread, we discussed it a bit
> in today's Plasma Monday hangout and here is a reiteration of the naming
> proposal. Please please /always/ keep plasma-devel in CC, if not, I'll
>
Hey all,
I've processed the discussion in the previous thread, we discussed it a bit
in today's Plasma Monday hangout and here is a reiteration of the naming
proposal. Please please /always/ keep plasma-devel in CC, if not, I'll hunt
you down at Akademy and give you a disapproving look.
Alright,
Am Mittwoch, 22. Januar 2014, 18:24:08 schrieb Martin Klapetek:
> Let me give a different example from the same area - do you remember
> Windows Longhorn? Everyone was talking about "Longhorn" always and how
> revolutionary and new it will be...and then, Windows Vista came out. From
> the very sam
Am Donnerstag, 23. Januar 2014, 11:36:12 schrieb Martin Klapetek:
> Given that we're dropping the name KDE from the working desktop almost
> completely and changing it for "Plasma" (so you'll no longer run "KDE" on
> your PC but you'll run "Plasma") I hope this will prevent that.
Nothing will be
Yet again: We already stated that it will *not* be Month1 update to Plasma
Month2 Year ... but Second update to ...
Cheerio,
Ivan
On 23 January 2014 14:46, Markus Slopianka wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 23. Januar 2014, 11:36:12 schrieb Martin Klapetek:
>
> > Given that we're dropping the name KDE f
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Markus Slopianka wrote:
>
> Apparently our own guys are confused by the whole situation and that's even
> before any public announcement of throwing even more confusing date-based
> version numbers into the mix.
>
> The media, btw, also reads Planet KDE. Therefore
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 1:13 AM, Markus Slopianka wrote:
> All you achieve with such a hard to comprehend "version number" is that
> people
> will call it KDE5.
>
Given that we're dropping the name KDE from the working desktop almost
completely and changing it for "Plasma" (so you'll no longer r
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 8:29 PM, Mark Gaiser wrote:
> >
> > I think this comparison is fair and I had it already written in my reply
> to
> > Markus (removed it as I don't like referring to the competition). Btw.
> how do
> > you know that it cost Microsoft billions? AFAIK "normal" users didn't
>
On Thursday, 23. January 2014. 1.13.05 Markus Slopianka wrote:
> "August 2014 Update of the May
> 2014 release of Plasma by KDE" is not easy.
We already stated that it will not be Month1 update to Month2 Year ... but
Second update to ...
Cheerio,
Ivan
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Jos Poortvliet wrote:
> Mark,
> You
> pointed out that "not everybody is happy" with this. That is fair and probably
> true. But is it relevant? Consensus does not mean everybody agrees. It doesn't
> even have to mean everybody is happy. That is simply not always p
Mark,
You
pointed out that "not everybody is happy" with this. That is fair and probably
true. But is it relevant? Consensus does not mean everybody agrees. It doesn't
even have to mean everybody is happy. That is simply not always possible in a
community. It means you're willing to step out o
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 7:46 PM, Martin Graesslin wrote:
> On Wednesday 22 January 2014 19:29:24 Mark Gaiser wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 6:24 PM, Martin Klapetek
>>
>> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 6:05 PM, Mark Gaiser wrote:
>> >> It just shows that not everyone is happy with the in
On Wednesday 22 January 2014 19:29:24 Mark Gaiser wrote:
> > Let me give a different example from the same area - do you remember
> > Windows Longhorn? Everyone was talking about "Longhorn" always and how
> > revolutionary and new it will be...and then, Windows Vista came out. From
> > the very sam
On Wednesday 22 January 2014 19:29:24 Mark Gaiser wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 6:24 PM, Martin Klapetek
>
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 6:05 PM, Mark Gaiser wrote:
> >> It just shows that not everyone is happy with the initial proposal.
> >>
> >> "The next version of plasma" has always
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 6:24 PM, Martin Klapetek
wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 6:05 PM, Mark Gaiser wrote:
>>
>>
>> It just shows that not everyone is happy with the initial proposal.
>>
>> "The next version of plasma" has always been made public under the names:
>> - PW2
>> - Plasma Workpaces
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 6:05 PM, Mark Gaiser wrote:
>
> It just shows that not everyone is happy with the initial proposal.
>
> "The next version of plasma" has always been made public under the names:
> - PW2
> - Plasma Workpaces 2
> - Plasma 2
>
> Yes, we right now have "Plasma 4.xx"
> We call
On 01/22/2014 09:13 AM, Sebastian Kügler wrote:
Hi,
[please keep plasma-devel cq. kde-promo in CC:]
On Wednesday, January 22, 2014 15:03:20 Markus Slopianka wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 22. Januar 2014, 10:56:02 schrieb Martin Gräßlin:
We made it always quite clear that this is a working title
No, yo
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> Hi,
>
> [please keep plasma-devel cq. kde-promo in CC:]
>
> On Wednesday, January 22, 2014 15:03:20 Markus Slopianka wrote:
>> Am Mittwoch, 22. Januar 2014, 10:56:02 schrieb Martin Gräßlin:
>> > We made it always quite clear that this is a
Hi,
[please keep plasma-devel cq. kde-promo in CC:]
On Wednesday, January 22, 2014 15:03:20 Markus Slopianka wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 22. Januar 2014, 10:56:02 schrieb Martin Gräßlin:
> > We made it always quite clear that this is a working title
>
> No, you didn't. *I* know that it was meant to be
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Markus Slopianka wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 22. Januar 2014, 10:56:02 schrieb Martin Gräßlin:
>
> > We made it always quite clear that this is a working title
>
> No, you didn't. *I* know that it was meant to be a working title but it was
> not always made clear in pub
On Tuesday 21 January 2014 02:43:04 Markus Slopianka wrote:
> Am Freitag, 17. Januar 2014, 18:37:27 schrieb Ivan Čukić:
> > It seems we mostly agree on the Plasma Year Month, and Plasma by KDE*
> > naming, at least in principle. Which is awesome.
>
> Considering that we already released official a
Am Freitag, 17. Januar 2014, 18:37:27 schrieb Ivan Čukić:
> It seems we mostly agree on the Plasma Year Month, and Plasma by KDE*
> naming, at least in principle. Which is awesome.
Considering that we already released official announcements de facto using
Plasma (Workspaces) 2 as branding for alm
On Monday 20 January 2014 11:41:10 Martin Klapetek wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 10:02 AM, argonel wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 2:00 AM, Martin Graesslin
wrote:
> >> But of course the main idea behind the version pattern change to a date
> >> based
> >> version number is to add more info
On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 10:02 AM, argonel wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 2:00 AM, Martin Graesslin wrote:
>
>>
>> But of course the main idea behind the version pattern change to a date
>> based
>> version number is to add more information to it. The main problem with
>> version
>> numbers is
On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 2:00 AM, Martin Graesslin wrote:
>
> But of course the main idea behind the version pattern change to a date
> based
> version number is to add more information to it. The main problem with
> version
> numbers is that they don't carry any information and nobody knows how ol
On Saturday 18 January 2014 21:53:55 Valorie Zimmerman wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Thomas Pfeiffer
wrote:
> > On Saturday 18 January 2014 15:53:16 Mark Gaiser wrote:
> >> I don't see anything wrong with naming the next plasma as just "Plasma
> >> 2". and subsequent releases should f
On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> On Saturday 18 January 2014 15:53:16 Mark Gaiser wrote:
>
>> I don't see anything wrong with naming the next plasma as just "Plasma
>> 2". and subsequent releases should follow the name: "Plasma
>> 2." so "Plasma 2.1". There is nothing wron
On Saturday 18 January 2014 15:53:16 Mark Gaiser wrote:
> I don't see anything wrong with naming the next plasma as just "Plasma
> 2". and subsequent releases should follow the name: "Plasma
> 2." so "Plasma 2.1". There is nothing wrong with that. It
> works for tons of software out there includin
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> Hey,
>
> Until now, we've been using "Plasma 2" as a working title for the next version
> of Plasma. We never formalized this, and the last discussion we had about this
> died out without producing a clear result. We've gone over these poi
On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Martin Graesslin wrote:
>
> I just want to add a few notes to the "code name" topic. First of all I
> think
> that any comparison to Ubuntu and MacOS does not matter. Whether they are
> successful or not cannot be reduced to the name at all.
Let me just set this
Am Samstag, 18. Januar 2014, 09.23:06 schrieb Martin Graesslin:
> Hi all,
Morning Martin
Very good summary. Thx!
> thanks to Martin for providing the pointer. Please everyone keep both lists
> in the CC. Replying to the thread makes it really difficult otherwise.
>
> That's why I am not replyin
Hi all,
thanks to Martin for providing the pointer. Please everyone keep both lists in
the CC. Replying to the thread makes it really difficult otherwise.
That's why I am not replying to any mail know.
I just want to add a few notes to the "code name" topic. First of all I think
that any compa
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 11:24 PM, Martin Klapetek wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 10:18 PM, Martin Graesslin wrote:
>
>>
>> It looks like the discussion split. There is no mail by Aaron on the
>> plasma
>> mailing list. Could someone please forward the mails so that it is
>> possible to
>> follo
I would just like to respond to one point (and related) as the rest was
pretty covered by Ivan.
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 5:32 PM, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> > Then again - you have Ubuntu (changing every 6 months), OS X and I
> don’t
>
>
> > know what elseand using an animal (weird ones in Ubu
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 10:18 PM, Martin Graesslin wrote:
>
> It looks like the discussion split. There is no mail by Aaron on the plasma
> mailing list. Could someone please forward the mails so that it is
> possible to
> follow the discussion and to add value to the discussion.
>
> Especially I'
On Friday 17 January 2014 22:08:36 Jos Poortvliet wrote:
> On Tuesday 14 January 2014 20:18:17 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> > Hey,
> >
> > Until now, we've been using "Plasma 2" as a working title for the next
> > version of Plasma. We never formalized this, and the last discussion we
> > had about t
On Tuesday 14 January 2014 20:18:17 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> Hey,
>
> Until now, we've been using "Plasma 2" as a working title for the next
> version of Plasma. We never formalized this, and the last discussion we
> had about this died out without producing a clear result. We've gone over
> thes
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 3:56 PM, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
>
>
> > - Version numbers seem confusing an not very expressive, these should
> rather
>
> > be a technical detail (for example to group bugzilla entries)
>
>
>
> Maybe a silly question: but who finds version numbers confusing?
>
The point w
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Aleix Pol wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Marco Calignano <
> marco.calign...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Why do we have to start with A? I guess we can (at least for the first
>> release name) find the name of the fish that better represent the
>> character
On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 20:02:05 Ivan Cukic wrote:
> > "KDE releases the First/Second/Third Update to the October 2014 release of
> > Plasma"
>
> Yes please!
Same here. :)
--
sebas
http://www.kde.org | http://vizZzion.org | GPG Key ID: 9119 0EF9
__
> "KDE releases the First/Second/Third Update to the October 2014 release of
> Plasma"
Yes please!
___
Plasma-devel mailing list
Plasma-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
That certainly makes it clearer in my opinion. +1 here.
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 11:20 AM, Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> El Dimarts, 14 de gener de 2014, a les 21:07:57, Martin Graesslin va escriure:
>> On Tuesday 14 January 2014 20:34:15 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
>> > El Dimarts, 14 de gener de 2014,
El Dimarts, 14 de gener de 2014, a les 21:07:57, Martin Graesslin va escriure:
> On Tuesday 14 January 2014 20:34:15 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> > El Dimarts, 14 de gener de 2014, a les 20:18:17, Sebastian Kügler va
>
> escriure:
> > > Hey,
> > >
> > > Until now, we've been using "Plasma 2" as a w
On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 14:29:47 Jos Poortvliet wrote:
> > Feedback to this proposal is very welcome, but please keep in mind that we
> > would like to move on with this question. It's highly subjective to
> > bike-shedding, and a decision is better than no decision.
>
> Agreed. There's qui
On Tuesday 14 January 2014 20:18:17 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> Hey,
>
> Until now, we've been using "Plasma 2" as a working title for the next
> version of Plasma. We never formalized this, and the last discussion we
> had about this died out without producing a clear result. We've gone over
> thes
On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 15:41:27 Carl Symons wrote:
> I like the marine animal/fish metaphor. Prolly don't need much promo
> domain expertise to come up with the name.
I was thinking about domain expertise in the underwater department, and I'm
offering my help. :)
--
sebas
http://www.kde.
On 01/14/2014 11:18 AM, Sebastian Kügler wrote:
Hey,
Until now, we've been using "Plasma 2" as a working title for the next version
of Plasma. We never formalized this, and the last discussion we had about this
died out without producing a clear result. We've gone over these points during
the sp
> "KDE releases the January Update to the October 2014 release of Plasma"
> "October 2014, january update"
This is a mouthful, and even more, quite confusing.
While I like the month/year idea (duh:)), this is kinda breaking the aims
we previously defined.
Cheerio,
Ivan
__
On Tuesday 14 January 2014 21:07:57 Martin Graesslin wrote:
> > I.e. as a user may want to see if the new release i'm going to install is
> > a
> > bugfix release (i.e. i'm going from 4.12.0 to 4.12.1) or if it is a new
> > feature release (i.e. i'm going from 4.12.0 to 4.13.0).
>
> "KDE releases
On Tuesday 14 January 2014 20:34:15 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> El Dimarts, 14 de gener de 2014, a les 20:18:17, Sebastian Kügler va
escriure:
> > Hey,
> >
> > Until now, we've been using "Plasma 2" as a working title for the next
> > version of Plasma. We never formalized this, and the last discu
El Dimarts, 14 de gener de 2014, a les 20:18:17, Sebastian Kügler va escriure:
> Hey,
>
> Until now, we've been using "Plasma 2" as a working title for the next
> version of Plasma. We never formalized this, and the last discussion we had
> about this died out without producing a clear result. We'
Hey,
Until now, we've been using "Plasma 2" as a working title for the next version
of Plasma. We never formalized this, and the last discussion we had about this
died out without producing a clear result. We've gone over these points during
the sprint, and discussed some details about it.
Som
64 matches
Mail list logo
