We can certainly consider this _if_ the current version in Cosmic really
is a problem for users that cannot practically be fixed any other way.
But please could you actually demonstrate that? For the only bug
actually linked, surely a cherry-pick would be lower regression risk for
existing users?

> We as Mixxx team do not support 2.1.x qt5 builds. So the user is
pretty alone with issues with throws a bad light on Mixxx.

We certainly appreciate involvement from upstreams, but I don't think
this qualifies as an SRU justification in itself. "We...do not support"
is certainly not a reason. You're entitled to choose not to support what
you wish (or more specifically you get to choose what you want to spend
your time on), but such a position is certainly not a justification to
ignore the stability* promises we make to Ubuntu users.

The focus on stable release updates must be on users, and their
expectation is of stability* in that, in general, no major version
updates are expected to pull the rug out from under their feet. What can
we do to fix these problems for this set of users? How difficult would
it be to cherry-pick bug fixes for them? If cherry-picking is practical
and would avoid problems for users successfully using the Cosmic package
today, why aren't we doing that?

Note that there are only four months left of support for Cosmic, and
that Disco will be out soon. It seems to be that the benefit of a major
update now would be limited, compared to the consequences of ignoring
our stability* promise to users. A user who tries to start using the
Cosmic package in three weeks will have the option of using Disco. A
user who is successfully using the Cosmic package today might never use
Ubuntu again if we break our stability promise and this destroys their
performance.

These are the promises we make to users for packages that ship as part
of the distribution. I can understand that you may find this
frustrating, but please remember that users of stable* distributions
_want_ this policy. If you would prefer to have control of your own
release management directly to your users, you might consider shipping a
snap (http://snapcraft.io/).

* Stability means different things to different people. In this context
I don't mean "no bugs"; obviously there are bugs and achieving no bugs
is generally not practical. In this context I mean "doesn't suddenly
change behaviour".

To be clear, I'm not ruling out an update to 2.2.x in Cosmic, but I
think there needs to be a real justification that includes an
explanation of the actual bugs actually impacting users in Cosmic and
why the fixes cannot practically be cherry-picked.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1804513

Title:
  Cosmic:  Mixxx 2.1.3 is not stable with Qt5

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/mixxx/+bug/1804513/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to