Pushing Plasma updates to bookwork

[Hefee]

Hi,
 
> > I tried to get an unblock pre-approval for Frameworks 5.104 with #1033271
> > and got a NACK but in my opinion not for the good reasons – difficulty
> > for the release team to review / unblock that number of packages.
>
> I must agree with the RT here, this comes too late in the release cycle.

Personally - I do not agree with the Release team. Sure I can understand the 
fear of Release team to that want to reduce their workload as we are not the 
only team requesting exceptions. But release team just put the workload on our 
plate: Digging all commits and only strips out the version bumping. I don't 
see were is the benefit. We just create a Debian own version of Frameworks, 
that upstream has now idea what is inside and that we may end up with a 
5.103.0-X version is actually the source of 5.104.0.
I still appreciate the work of Release Team. Many thx to all of your work!

> > I'm *not* trying again with Plasma. I don't have better arguments than for
> > Frameworks and I don't expect the same kind of inputs to get a different
> > output.

One idea of my side is to get in contact with release team and to lead the 
request. One option in my head is, that we may ship the new Plasma version 
with a point release. That at least would be a compromise:
Get the release ready soon, but users will get the bugfixes. Okay a little bit 
later.

> > So I'm reaching out to the team, maybe someone here can have a better idea
> > on how to proceed. Further Plasma 5.27.x releases have *loads* of fixes
> > including important crashers and screen management-related fixes which
> > would be a shame not to have in bookworm and would make the release
> > strictly lower quality.
> > 
> > I'm slowly going through Frameworks releases and backporting seemingly
> > important fixes on top of 5.103 but it feels like self-inflicted pain so
> > motivation is low. I'm *not* doing it for Plasma where the number of
> > commits to backport would be even higher than Frameworks, and probably
> > more intricate too.

Thanks for all your work!

> If I understand correctly this will be the last Qt5-based Plasma
> release. If this is it, and as long as it does not require any
> transition (rebuild existing binaries mostly) I would perhaps think of
> an official backport.

We cannot do this backport via debian-backports, as we only allowed to package 
the version we have in sid and we need to provide updates until trixie is 
released and we want to package Plasma 6 :) So we would need to setup a own 
repository.

Regards,

hefee
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-kde-talk/attachments/20230421/7c69e096/attachment-0001.sig>