Primary tabs

MAY
9
2004

Should KDE PIM follow a separate release schedule / library requirements than the rest of KDE?

Comments

I don't agree with the seperate release schedule, but I do agree with their maintaining KDE 3.2 compatibility (I know of no other library requirements), but since it seems this is more about the seperate release schedule than the library requirements, I picked "no" when my answer really would have been, "I don't like the seperate release schedule, but the compat with KDE 3.2 is nice"

My 2 cents.


By mattr at Mon, 05/17/2004 - 14:08

I think the currently different of release scedule is an incident, isn't it?

To me a central release scedule seems a good thing, but maybe KDE will someday become to big for this 'ideal'.


By cies at Wed, 06/30/2004 - 08:43

thats why I voted yes. It whouldn't be nice if the new version for kde pim whould be delayed because it has to wait for the whole kde to be finished. and the whole kde shoulnt have to wait for pim.

I think quite large parts of kde, like koffice and kde pim should be allowed to have a seperate release schedule - although they should try to keep it in sync with the whole of KDE.


By superstoned at Wed, 06/30/2004 - 09:52

yes.
we have already qt 3.3.2 (already tested) before kde 33.
so kdelibs+kdevelop should be released about a month or three before other pckages.


By 20khz at Sun, 07/04/2004 - 17:12