Re: [Opensync-devel] kitchensync

[Harald J. <ha...@a-...>]

On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 04:10:30PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> Hi,

Hello

> 
> On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 07:53:31AM -0700, Emanoil Kotsev wrote:
> > --- On Fri, 11/5/10, Harald Jenny <ha...@a-...> wrote:> 
> > > There were few discussions about the future of opensync and about
> > > kitchensync as part of kde4. Quentin got kitchensync into kde-dev,
> > > so if I'm not wrong it is in kde already, but somewhere in dev.
> > 
> > So the main point should be to make them move it into normal kde again
> > :-).
> 
> If kitchensync is a seperate source tarball, that would mean getting
> fixes into Debian would be much easier, as a kdepim upload is a huge
> task. 

That's true but as opensync is a moving targets this will put much stress on a
single maintainer...

> I wanted to get some of the Mandriva fixes into kitchensync for
> Debian lenny. but the KDE maintainers ignored them for kdepim, for
> example.

Hmmm that's not nice but maybe at this point the removal of kitchensync was
already in the work.

> 
> > I'm not sure what decision was made about opensync. Opensync and
> > plugins should move accordingly. We are talking here about v0.40
> 
> One thing we might want to reconsider is on focusing on 0.40 as the next
> stable release.  With 0.39 out a long time ago and a lot of fixes (and a
> working akonadi plugin, yay!), I think another development release
> should be made ASAP.

Sounds good

> 
> Now, how to version it? 0.39.1 looks weird.  Three options:
> 
> 1. Use 0.50 and aim for 0.60 as the next stable relase (a renamed 0.40).
> 
> 2. Use 0.40 and just don't declare it stable, 1.0 will be the next
> stable release.
> 
> 3. Use 0.40alpah1, 0.40alpha2, 0.40beta1, 0.40rc1 and so forth.

Um...

> 
> Just saying "the next release will be 0.40, and it will be stable" is
> problematic, as that means hacking on trunk without much user feedback
> and a pressure to get it right and all bugs resolved which might take
> another couple of years.

I guess the focus must be to have a somewhat working environment which wont
change to much while bugs are being fixed.

> 
> Finally, let me reiterate something on the release: Either release the
> core opensync (and formats/bindings) first and announce a plugin relase
> a month (or so) later or let plugins catch up with the core release and
> release later (as the same version).  Or even better, do both.

Hmmm although the second one sounds better the former will more likely happen?

> 
> This would make it easier for plugin authors to shift their focus
> towards opensync when it's needed (i.e. when all the new APIs have to be
> ported to).

Agreed

> 
> > And I guess that coordinating the whole thing with the responsible
> > Debian people before doing anything is a good idea.
> 
> Well, that is me for the most part, so should be doable.

*ggg* good to hear, maybe with a good new Debian release I can find the time to
look at the Motorola plugin.

> 
> > Again, I want to know what are the official plans for Opensync and
> > who's in charge with what. 
> 
> It's somewhat clear who is in charge of which plugin, but who has the
> say on release management is much less clear; it was Daniel Gollub for
> the last bunch of releases, but I am not sure he still steering the
> project to this end?
> 
> 
> Michael

Kind regards
Harald

> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The Next 800 Companies to Lead America's Growth: New Video Whitepaper
> David G. Thomson, author of the best-selling book "Blueprint to a 
> Billion" shares his insights and actions to help propel your 
> business during the next growth cycle. Listen Now!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SAP-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Opensync-devel mailing list
> Ope...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensync-devel