On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 11:20 AM, Rex Dieter wrote: > > Like most any group making hard decisions, the KDE SIG bases them on the > best information available. Fact is, we extensively tested this new version > for over a month, and every serious issue/blocker that was reported or > identified was addressed prior to releasing this. > > Unfortunately, it seems there were more problems than what we were aware of > when the decision was made to do the 4.4.0 (stable) update. Yeah, that > sucks. > Maybe 1 month of testing was not enough. We should have left it in update-testing for 2 months, 3 months... This would give more time to the "curious" users to test KDE. This is why I defend the extensive use of updates-testing idea. 4.x.0 releases stay in updates-testing for a month. It is never pushed to stable. After a month 4.x.1 is released with bugfixes. That one goes to testing, stays there for about another month and then it will be pushed to stable. x.0.0 releases wait 1 full Fedora release to get in (speaking of 4.0.0 if anyone didn't notice.). There is one more thing. Very important thing. We have been pushing KDE releases asap so far, and although it hurt me at times (at school and at work), I like it. I don't blame people who don't. Here is the thing: The bugs need to be reported most of the time to get fixed. Fedora has been a pioneer in KDE development in this sense. If we don't push 4.x.0 releases to stable, the 4.x.1 will be more buggy, since not many distros do kde 4.x.0 updates to their stable releases. Someone has to make some sort of sacrifice but I cannot come up with a good-for-all resolution for this issue. Orcan -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
