kubuntu-council team mailing list archive

[Rick Timmis <ricktimmis68@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hello Rik, Kubuntu

Thank you Rik, for your clear and well set out email. I can see merits in
both approaches, and from a technical perspective I would have chosen
solution B.

However, my primary concern is with our users, and providing them with the
best KDE based distro in a way they have come to expect. With that
perspective firmly in mind I believe A is the right way forward.

I say A is the correct approach.

Best Wishes
Rick

On Mon, 21 May 2018 09:12 Rik Mills, <rikmills@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Our default PPA policy for LTS releases states that [1]
>
> "Monthly KDE software release backports are made available through the
> Kubuntu PPA for as long as supported by the native LTS software stack
> but no longer than 2 years."
>
> For 16.04 LTS we allowed an upgrade of Qt in the backports PPA [2] from
> 5.5 to 5.6.x, however this was not altogether a radical decision as the
> Qt 5.6 release was a LTS one, and already being built and maintained by
> the Ubuntu phone/Qt team in their overlay PPA.
>
> For 18.04 LTS, we are already on Qt 5.9 LTS, with more point releases to
> come, hopefully as SRU updates to the main archive.
>
> Now Plasma 5.13 requires Qt => 5.10, so we need to discuss and decide an
> acceptable course of action, assuming that we wish to provide this and
> future updates update via a PPA to our users.
>
> Realistic options are IMO:
>
> (a) Provide updated Qt once again in our backports PPA, but make it
> quite clear that the level of support, both immediate an ongoing, if
> users choose to add that and upgrade will be limited by the fact that
> they are deliberately choosing to move off an LTS supported stack.
>
> (b) Keep backports PPA building against Qt 5.9.x, and provide Plasma
> backports and other software dependant on newer non-LTS Qt in a separate
> more 'experimental' PPA.
>
> (c) Something else? Comment welcome.
>
> For simplicity (a) is appealing, and more or less what users seem to be
> expecting us to do for them. (b) however has some advantages as it would
> perhaps allow users (say organisational ones) to upgrade to new KDE
> Applications releases (18.04, 18.08 etc) and others backports, without
> moving off LTS supported Qt, assuming future Apps are compatible.
>
> With Plasma 5.13 as few weeks away [3], and bugfix release to that which
> we would probably want to wait for before pushing to a not experimental
> location, not to mention getting Qt built, we have some thinking time. I
> would also note the decision will be tempered by practical and technical
> considerations the development team find while doing test builds, and
> evaluating the quality and stability of the non LTS Qt.
>
> Thank you. I look forward to comments.
>
> Rik Mills
> Kubuntu Council
> Kubuntu Developer
>
> [1] https://community.kde.org/Kubuntu/Policies#Long_Term_Support_.28LTS.29
> [2] https://launchpad.net/~kubuntu-ppa/+archive/ubuntu/backports
> [3] https://community.kde.org/Schedules/Plasma_5
>
>
> --
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kubuntu-council
> Post to     : kubuntu-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kubuntu-council
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>