New KDE Frameworks Versions as SRU

[Harald Sitter]

On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Scott Kitterman <ubuntu at kitterman.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, November 20, 2014 03:19:10 PM Jonathan Riddell wrote:
>> I'd like to propose to the tech board to give an update allowance for new
>> versions of KDE Frameworks.  I don't expect this to be the quickest of
>> discussions so we may as well get started :)
>>
>> Currently we have a micro release update exception for KDE SC bugfix
>> releases.
>>
>> KDE Frameworks has no bugfix releases because upstream decided they didn't
>> have the resources to make them.  Instead they have new releases every
>> month with both bugfixes and new features.  However these are libraries so
>> applications will be using the existing ABI and that ABI (the symbols) is
>> not allowed to change.  The functionality of those symbols is also not
>> allowed to change.  Any new features are in new symbols and existing
>> applications won't use them.  So updates in the archive will be bugfix only
>> for applications in the archive.
>
> They already failed at this once, so I don't feel confident in this assertion.

So did kdelibs4.

>> Allowing a SRU version exception will allow these bugfixes.  It will also
>> make it easier for backports of Plasma to use the version of KF5 in the
>> archive.  It will also make Kubuntu a nicer platform for people developing
>> with Qt and KF5 because they'll be able to easily get the latest version.
>>
>> KF5 is in Utopic but nothing in the archive uses it so it might be a nice
>> way to start and reassure everyone it'll be a smooth process.
>>
>> I'd like to send this to the tech board, any thoughts?
>
> I'm against it.

Against asking? Oo

> We got the exception for KDE4 because upstream had an updates policy (which
> you wrote/socialized upstream) that was consistent with our SRU requirements.
> This is not true for KF5.  I don't think that the fact that there was an
> exception for KDE4 is relevant.

Except that frameworks derive from the same code base, are made by the
same people and powers the continuations of previously seen kdelibs4
applications.

> The upstream maintenance policy is clearly at odds with our SRU policy, so an
> exception is inappropriate.  Consider that it's called a micro-release
> exception and upstream has decided they aren't doing micro-releases at all.
>
> Since we will freeze our versions for development with a compatible KF5 and
> Plasma 5, there's no need for newer feature versions in the archive.  We have
> approximately a bazillion PPAs for people that want newer crack.  We shouldn't
> inflict it on the entire user base.

There is a need for bugfixes, which unfortunately may or may not
contain features. That being said, with frameworks being mostly
libraries a 'feature' is a new function, which quite simply can not
break existing functions by being there. C++ doesn't work like this.

HS