Re: KDEPIM 4.1?

On Wednesday 30 April 2008 15:57:50 Allen Winter wrote:
> Some folks say KMail is ready.  I'm not so sure.

I'm using KMail since a couple of months with imap (GMail) completely 
flawlessly.
I've had a couple of crashes occasionally here and there, but no data has ever 
been lost, and all the operations I tried have worked fine.
What is the problem for it? (apart for not using akonadi)

Bye,
-Riccardo
--

-- 
GPG key:
3D0F6376
When encrypting, please encrypt also for this subkey:
9EBD7FE1
-----
Pace Peace Paix Paz Frieden Pax Pokój Friður Fred Béke 和平
Hasiti Lapé Hetep Malu Mир Wolakota Santiphap Irini Peoch שלום
Shanti Vrede Baris Rój Mír Taika Rongo Sulh Mir Py'guapy 평화
_______________________________________________
release-team mailing list
release-team <at> kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team

Re: [Kde-bindings] Pre-approved Languages

On Wednesday 30 April 2008, Richard Dale wrote:
> > On Wednesday 30 April 2008, Allen Winter wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 29 April 2008 18:34:29 Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> > > > of course, if bindings ever get made for another module we're going
> > > > to be in this same boat again aren't we? i wonder if later on it
> > > > might make sense to split up kdebindings into modules that reflect
> > > > the KDE/ modules ... so kdebindings-libs, kdebindings-base,
> > > > kdebindings-pim ...
> > > >
> > > > i assume this would be a major pain for the bindings teams, but would
> > > > it be feasible? if so, when would be a realistic time frame for such
> > > > a modification?
> > >
> > > Or, maybe each current module can have a bindings subdir?
> > > i.e. kdelibs/bindings, kdebase/bindings, kdepimlibs/bindings, ...?
>
> The second suggestion seems sensible to me, with subdirs for each language
> like kdelibs/bindings/python etc. Having a whole new set of modules in
> parallel with the existing libs just seems to complicate things. But I
> don't know enough about this discussion to know what problem we're trying
> to solve.
The problem is circular dependencies. A python applet was introduced in 
kdebase, which means kdebase depends on kdebindings while kdebindings depends 
on kdebase. The issue was solved by moving the python applet to kdeutils, but 
the problem might happen again in the future.

--

-- 
Cyrille Berger

Build management software

Dear KDE Community,

My name is Per Eriksson, involved in the OpenOffice.org community and
the QA project.

I am interested in knowing how you handle the builds and releases and
maintain and distribute accurate information within these areas.

Are you using a build tracker or releases tracker, or using issues?

I am very interested in how you guys work!

:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.
Best Regards
Per Eriksson
Marketing Contact Sweden
OpenOffice.org
Phone: +46 70 560 10 33
Email: pereriksson@...
Web: http://sv.openoffice.org/

Re: Pre-approved Languages

On Tuesday 29 April 2008, Allen Winter wrote:

> kdesupport -> kdelibs -> kdepimlibs -> kdebase -> kdebindings -> everything

kdesupport
kdelibs
kdebase-workspace
kdepimlibs
kdebindings
kdebase-runtime
kdebase
everything else

so just kdebase-workspace is the bad place to put. I also don't think it 
belongs there, it is more an app (like kdebase/apps) or an admin/utility. 

Greetings,
Dirk

Fwd: KDE 4.0.4 uploaded

Hi, 

sorry, forgot to CC release-team@

Greetings,
Dirk

From: Dirk Mueller <mueller@...>
Subject: KDE 4.0.4 uploaded
Date: 2008-05-01 16:40:26 GMT

Hi, 

KDE 4.0.4 tarballs have been uploaded.. Announcement Tuesday/Wednesday next 
week. Please let me know if you plan to provide packages. 

Thanks,
Dirk
_______________________________________________
Kde-packager mailing list
Kde-packager@...
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-packager

Re: release-team session at akademy?

Op dinsdag 29 april 2008 20:47 schreef u:
> Hi, 
> 
> I think it is a good idea to do a release-team session at akademy'08, to 
> gather input about the release process and collect post mortem information 
> about the KDE 4.1 release process, and perhaps attract new people who want to 
> help with stuff .
> 
> Any opinion?

Good idea.

Toma

Re: release-team session at akademy?

On Tuesday 29 April 2008 20:47:06 Dirk Mueller wrote:
> I think it is a good idea to do a release-team session at akademy'08, to
> gather input about the release process and collect post mortem information
> about the KDE 4.1 release process, and perhaps attract new people who want
> to help with stuff .
>
> Any opinion?

Good idea :)
--

-- 
sebas

 http://www.kde.org | http://vizZzion.org |  GPG Key ID: 9119 0EF9 

Please keep KDevelop+KDevPlatform out of KDE 4.1

Hi,

on behalf of the KDevelop team I'd like to ask the release-team to not
do any further releases of the kdevelop or kdevplatform module for KDE
4.1. 

We won't have something releaseable in the proposed deadlines, so it
doesn't make sense to ship further alpha or beta releases for those two
modules.

As before the 4.0 release this also affects kdewebdev/quanta, which also
can't be released due to the dependency on kdevplatform (and they're not
ready either). I don't know the state of other apps in kdewebdev, so
just disabling compilation of quanta in that module should be ok.

Andreas

--

-- 
You will experience a strong urge to do good; but it will pass.

Re: Please keep KDevelop+KDevPlatform out of KDE 4.1

On Saturday 03 May 2008 10:55:18 Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> As before the 4.0 release this also affects kdewebdev/quanta, which also
> can't be released due to the dependency on kdevplatform (and they're not
> ready either). I don't know the state of other apps in kdewebdev, so
> just disabling compilation of quanta in that module should be ok.

I think anything that depends on KDevPlatform needs to be disabled. I don't 
know what's with KXSLDbg, as that one was ported to a KDevelop plugin. If it 
still exists as a standalone application as well, it can remain, otherwise 
needs to be disabled until at least KDevPlatform is disabled.

I'm CC'ing to quanta-devel, so the KXSLDbg author can comment.

Andras

--

-- 

Quanta Plus developer - http://quanta.kdewebdev.org
K Desktop Environment - http://www.kde.org

4.2 Feature Plan

I notice theres now a 4.2 Feature Plan page on techbase at 
http://techbase.kde.org/Schedules/KDE4/4.2_Feature_Plan. Now, on the 4.1 
page, http://techbase.kde.org/Schedules/KDE4/4.1_Feature_Plan, it says 
that "Entries added after that date will be scheduled for the 4.2 release." 
(regarding 20th April). Should that say something like "Don't add anything to 
this page since all new features should be scheduled for 4.2 so add them the 
other page instead"?

Also, should I encourage owners of features that are 'red' and are not going 
to make the feature freeze on the 4.1 page to remove them from there and add 
them to the 4.2 page instead?

Regards,
Matt Williams