Patrick, On Wednesday, December 13, 2023 3:00:23 PM MST Patrick Franz wrote: > Don't forget that the open-source Qt LTS releases are delayed by a year. I wasn’t aware of that. Can you please elaborate on how that timeline works? One of the things I am hoping to accomplish with this bug report is to collect all the information that everyone has regarding this issue in one place to make it easy for others to find it in the future. My understanding is that LTS releases for Qt WebEngine are not delayed because the AGPL license doesn’t allow it. > KDE doesn't have LTS releases, only Plasma has. I didn’t know that either. > If Plasma 6 continues the path of Plasma 5, they'll have LTS releases > every 2 years, namely early in even years so that it fits with the Ubuntu > LTS release among other things. And that is quite a bad fit for Debian. > [Plasma 5.27 in bookworm is an outlier. It was made LTS because it is > the last Plasma 5 release.] Debian stable tends to release in the summer of odd years and Ubuntu LTS tends to release in the spring of even years. If KDE synchronizes their schedule to release at the beginning of even years to make it easier to be packaged into Ubuntu LTS releases, that makes we wonder how many other projects also synchronize their release schedules to make it easier for Ubuntu. Perhaps there are really good reasons for not doing so, but would it be in Debian’s interest to change our release schedule to be in the summer of even years? If other projects besides KDE coordinate their LTS releases around even years, then it might make the lives of many package maintainers easier. > > If you don’t think it is feasible to ship LTS versions of KDE and Qt > > in stable, how do you propose handling proper security support for > > KDE and Qt? > > I can only do with what I have. If you want better support, you need > more resources. It seems to me that shipping LTS releases of KDE Plasma and Qt in stable would require less effort, not more. It would require less packaging of intermediate releases (because I assume packaging an LTS point release would take less effort than releases that had feature changes). Other KDE components, like KMail, could be packaged up to the latest versions that build on top of the LTS releases. And even though KMail doesn’t have an LTS release, it would benefit from stable security updates to Qt WebEngine. -- Soren Stoutner soren@stoutner.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.