12 Feb
2014
12 Feb
'14
7:30 p.m.
On 02/12/2014 12:01 PM, Calvin Morrison wrote:
I think like everything, moderation is good.
There's always the tug
and pull or wanting to get users fixes, but not wanting to screw
anything up
Sorry for my long winded speech
No need, it is a good discussion. I did not say not to do bug fixes or
improvements, what I said was make minor version/release bumps "mean
something".
What I said was:
<quote>
...there is nothing wrong with maintenance releases of the form
R14.0.0-[X+1]
So long as there are no build differences to the packagers required within
maintenance release. For example, upon R14.0.0-1 release the build requirements
for each of the packages are frozen. Through the next 50 (or whatever number)
maintenance releases (R14.0.0-1 -> R14.0.0-50) all packages will continue to
build in the same manner as they built with R14.0.0-1.
</quote>
What I also said was tying a release to time is meaningless. Again, version
number changes major/minor mean something. Significant changes, deprecation in
API fuctions, or breaks in backwards compatibility, if not, just implement the
change as a R14.0.0-Num change.
The same applies to the packaging/naming standards. If we are going to release
as R14, then it is R14.0.0-X until there are major changes or deprecations and
then it becomes R14.0.1-X. When there are breaks with compatibility we have
R14.1.0-X. And when we want to make it no longer look/feel, behave or perform
like traditional KDE3, then we have
(something else).0.0-1
Lastly before we schedule R14.0.1-X for release, we need to know what major
changes are going into R14.0.1, otherwise, it is a release just for the sake of
release. That is what is to be avoided.
I have never been a fan of R14 for a name because I saw no continuity or
relationship between 3.5.13 and R14. I saw far more logic in 3.5.14 (but that
does not follow standards since there are breaks in compatibility) so 3.6.0 made
more since to me. And... knowing there was never a KDE 3.6 it did more than
enough to signify a break/change with KDE while continuing the traditional look
an feel. But, being a team player, I'll go with R14.0.0 even though package
managers never like package versions that start with a 'letter'.....
trinity-R14.0.0-1.i686.tar.xz, though
tde-R14.0.0-1.i686.tar.xz speaks volumes more about what the desktop is and
where it came from.
tde-3.6.0-1.i686.tar.xz says it all...
Like I said, for discussion purposes, this is what logic says to me. That
doesn't mean something else is more/less wrong.
--
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.