Plasma 5 on Kubuntu 14.10

[Steve Langasek]

Hi again,

On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 11:48:44AM +0200, Rohan Garg wrote:
> So ... Could we move forward with this?

Sorry if I wasn't clear earlier.  I think there is no problem with you
moving forward with such a tech preview image built from a ppa.  My
objection is only to publishing it as a "release" under cdimage.ubuntu.com
come 14.10, since it will not be built from supported packages.

If you think we need to have more discussion about this point, we can
continue to do so; in the meantime I don't believe this question should in
any way block you from moving forward with a tech preview of KDE5.

On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 06:02:31PM +0200, Rohan Garg wrote:

> > Given the desired frequency of releases, which does not align with a
> > full ubuntu release cycle. There will be no ability to provide
> > security, updates, proposed and backports pockets & PPAs do not have
> > such facilities. Given the garbage collection of builds from PPAs and
> > image build from a given PPA 3 months ago might no longer have sources
> > intact and hence for example require alternative means, e.g. a sources
> > image.

> > In my mind, a released image flavor should have it's sources/binaries
> > accessible and frozen + have security/updates/proposed/backports
> > streams available for subsequent updates.

> However we don't want to call this a flavour, instead we want to call it a
> technical preview.  Plus, if 1% of the user audience of this ISO really
> wants to reproduce the build, they can grab the packaging from our
> packaging branch, grab the tar from download.kde.org and reproduce the
> build.  Sure it's not as straight forward as apt-get source, however it
> can still be done.


> We want a ISO because of the following reasons :

> 1) It provides valuable feedback to upstream KDE developers in the
> form of bug reports.

> 2) Allows the Kubuntu team to iterate and react faster since we bypass SRU
> requirements, this also has the additional benefit of providing feedback
> regarding the quality of upstream bugfix releases which can be used in
> future releases as concrete data for MRE qualifications

> 3) Allows us to provide new feature releases to users without them having
> to add the PPA when by themselves when the 5.1 version of workspaces comes
> out.  This is not something that can be achieved with the regular archive

Does this imply that you are planning to do post-release updates via the
ppa on top of utopic?  Why would you want to do this rather than rolling
users forward directly to u+1?


> 5) We provide packages via a PPA so any packages are already being
> published on canonical's servers and required to be compliant with the
> licencing requirements of PPAs

Well, hopefully this point is a no-op :)

> 6) We don't intend to provide upgrade mechanisms for this CD from 14.10 to
> 15.04

Does that mean you are deliberately *disabling* the stock upgrade support?

Cheers,
-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek at ubuntu.com                                     vorlon at debian.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-release/attachments/20140710/21adc0a6/attachment.pgp>