On Friday 10 April 2009 20:51:24 Richard wrote:

The OBS is part of the openSuSE structure, maintained by openSuSE.org, provided as a SERVICE and is a form of distribution, used (if we are to believe anything we read in these mail lists) to create the last distribution and presumably the upcoming release(s) and probably many of the included applications and other programs and libraries used by openSuSE and the versions of DE's like KDE and others.

No, far from everything in there is in any way officially maintained by SUSE. Any member of the openSUSE community can maintain packages in the build service

So when something breaks something in the OBS

It didn't break. It was ported to KDE4. If you don't like that, take it up with the developer (who does not work for SUSE)

This idea of "OFFICIAL" openSuSE updates is very nebulous at best. First, it is very ill defined.

No, it is very well defined. It is anything you get in the official Update channel.

Second, it often breaks existing released code.

It shouldn't, and normally doesn't. If you run into something that does, please file a bug, because that would be an extremely serious incident.

Third, often the fix is 'WONTFIX' ostensibly because of lack of resources or interest or simple laziness.

Telling people to 'Stick with the older version of the package' is tantamount to saying "We know there are other bugs in our software that we will fix and release in the future,

No, it is saying "the (external) developer ported his application to KDE4, so if you want to use KDE3 you can't use the newer packages Anders -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Am Freitag, 10. April 2009 21:09:08 schrieb John Andersen:

...

It didn't break. It was ported to KDE4. If you don't like that, take it up with the developer (who does not work for SUSE)

Then why was it offered as an update to KDE3? And why does it continue to be offered today? This discussion is starting to get ridicilous, as much as I see some problems here and there in openSUSE I've to confirm Anders point.

This is a package from BS, it's maintained and packaged by someone from the community. Period. It's not nor was it ever an updated offered by openSUSE. Just to get the facts straight. Now let's get to the details: Zypper is a packagemanager (used by the YaST sw_single module), which registers some channels (you tell it) and monitores them. So it detects when new packages are available, now _you _ can say "Hey, upgrade the packages for me". This will download the whole package and replaces the old files with the files of a new version. (Most likely the version number of the program will change) And then there's the openSUSE update applet (and the update-repos you can define in YaST). The default is the standard update repo, maintained by openSUSE. The applet checks for updates every 24h or so. If it has some new updates it shows you a red or yellow warning sign, indicating how critical a patch is. If you tell it to install those patches, it'll load a patch and change the problematic files, but will not upgrade to a new version! (The program keeps the old version number) Terminology wise it's a huge difference if you talk about upgrading or updating a package. (but that just as a sidenote) Regards Michael

On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 03:38:59PM -0400, Richard wrote:

On Fri April 10 2009 2:59:56 pm Anders Johansson wrote:

...

On Friday 10 April 2009 20:51:24 Richard wrote:

...

The OBS is part of the openSuSE structure, maintained by openSuSE.org, provided as a SERVICE and is a form of distribution, used (if we are to believe anything we read in these mail lists) to create the last distribution and presumably the upcoming release(s) and probably many of the included applications and other programs and libraries used by openSuSE and the versions of DE's like KDE and others.

No, far from everything in there is in any way officially maintained by SUSE. Any member of the openSUSE community can maintain packages in the build service

Then CLEARLY define OFFICIAL and NON-official sections of the OBS as such. If someone 'fixes' something that is used as part of an OFFICIAL package, such as KDE, then if KDE is going to be part of an OFFICIAL release, it should be MAINTAINED as part of the release until EOL in the official distribution channels (whatever that is) and not allow devs or anyone else make changes to the official portion of the OBS until the 'fix' or patch or enhancement is tested and found suitable for inclusion in the OFFICIAL distribution. Stuff in the UNofficial portion of the OBS certainly can't be openSuSE's responsibility unless it is part of the OFFICIAL release (in which case, it is misplaced in the OBS).

Officially maintained is only the distribution itself and the update channel. Nothing under /repositories/ is "officialy" maintained nor endorsed for less experienced users. Ciao, Marcus -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Friday 10 April 2009 04:35:14 pm Carlos E. R. wrote:

On Friday, 2009-04-10 at 15:38 -0400, Richard wrote:

...

...

No, far from everything in there is in any way officially maintained by SUSE. Any member of the openSUSE community can maintain packages in the build service

Then CLEARLY define OFFICIAL and NON-official sections of the OBS as such. If someone 'fixes' something that is used as part of an OFFICIAL

All of the OBS is unofficial.

However, the maintainers of the OBS packages should accept bugzillas and repair what they break. Them, not suse/novell.

The problem is that in opensource there is no must, it is all want, and subject to availability of time to develop, or debug something. People often forget that all openSUSE offers officially is limited time installation support, If someone needs to have something fixed in timely manner then I'm afraid that SLED would the only way to go. Besides, now it is Richard, before was somebody else, that takes all, on any server under SUSE/Novell control, is official. I guess that everyone that wasn't with SUSE in pre Build Service times has problem to differentiate official and unofficial repositories. -- Regards, Rajko -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Saturday, 2009-04-11 at 11:18 +0200, lynn wrote:

...

If someone needs to have something fixed in timely manner then I'm afraid that SLED would the only way to go.

Ah. Good. Something positive. I buy SLED and my bugs get fixed quicker. It costs $50. Is that $50 for each machine that runs it? Would I get my bugs fixed quicker? Would someone come around and fix it when NFS ran slowly? For me that's $1000 worth of pain releif. Does anyone know if it works? Is it worth $1000 to get SLED? Will it get my LAN get fixed by a Novell engineer when it doesn't work? And all I do is make them coffee? Please tell me that's true.

X'-) I don't think so. I don't really know what level of "support" they give, but I expect they handle bugs. However, you do not get upgrades, there is no OBS: the original problem was caused by an upgrade of some packages from a "non official" source, which in SLE(D) would void support coverage. It's a tricky situation, this. We are told that we'll get kde3 from the OBS from now on, but it turns out that if there are bugs there they are rejected. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkngcY4ACgkQtTMYHG2NR9XpowCgiblNEPCJ+mQsh+O4j4Rr5w9u ISAAn3Tk9OiteS5uHMw53uhUKh/706cl =slX5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Saturday, 2009-04-11 at 14:04 +0200, Sven Burmeister wrote:

Am Samstag, 11. April 2009 12:31:39 schrieb Carlos E. R.:

...

It's a tricky situation, this. We are told that we'll get kde3 from the OBS from now on, but it turns out that if there are bugs there they are rejected.

KDE3 will be community maintained, so if there is a KDE3 community, it will fix bugs. I think it makes sense that openSUSE focuses its resources on the products that are part of the 11.2 release.

No problem there, but the OBS has published packages upgrades for kde3 that break kde3. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkngjVsACgkQtTMYHG2NR9XwMgCfd0YFRJvFXONIZ4OsSx2ao727 6h4An27U3+k1zKyNTNl777gr1d25LXK3 =bh0L -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Am Samstag, 11. April 2009 22:13:39 schrieb Richard Creighton:

I think it makes sense that openSuSE focuses its resources on the CURRENT release, not a release that is sometime in the future. It also seems that by correcting bugs in the CURRENT release, the fixes can be ported/included in the future one.

Neither was the package in question installed from the current release nor will it be part of the next release, so that argument falls flat. But even if that bug was in a package which was part of an openSUSE release, it is still up to the devs to decide whether the costs outweigh the benefits of fixing it, since KDE3 is a dead end and that time could be spent on KDE4 which will replace it. In fact, if you stick to your own rule, KDE4 is the current and the future release (as opposed to KDE3) and hence devs should focus on it because by improving the current release of KDE4 they improve future releases of it too, which is not the case for KDE3. Sven -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Am Sonntag, 12. April 2009 05:06:23 schrieb Carlos E. R.:

On Sunday, 2009-04-12 at 04:46 +0200, Sven Burmeister wrote:

...

But even if that bug was in a package which was part of an openSUSE release, it is still up to the devs to decide whether the costs outweigh the benefits of fixing it, since KDE3 is a dead end and that time could be spent on KDE4 which will replace it.

The problem the OP poster reported is that an upgrade from the OBS of KDE3 upgraded a package to KDE4. That should not happen, dead end or not.

Not necessarily bound to this thread but what do you expect if people use the 11.2 DVD to upgrade their KDE3 system?

The metaproblem, however, is more general, not only kde 3 or 4: that bugs in current release should be fixed, even if it is in the OBS.

I cannot speak for other projects but KDE3 is a dead end and not part of the next release so that makes its priority very low. Using OBS packages does not increase that assessment. KDE4 bugs in OBS packages, except for UNSTBALE, are fixed. I'm not sure if there is any other project as big as KDE that has two major versions in parallel but I think in case of KDE3 it is absolutely comprehensible that there are just too little resources to bother about its low-priority (e.g. screensaver) and/or OBS bugs if the community does not want to take care of it. Sven -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Am Sonntag, 12. April 2009 13:52:08 schrieb Carlos E. R.:

On Sunday, 2009-04-12 at 13:14 +0200, Sven Burmeister wrote:

...

...

The problem the OP poster reported is that an upgrade from the OBS of KDE3 upgraded a package to KDE4. That should not happen, dead end or not.

Not necessarily bound to this thread but what do you expect if people use the 11.2 DVD to upgrade their KDE3 system?

11.2 DVD? It doesn't say anything about that in the bugzilla.

I know, as I wrote, it is not bound to this thread, just a question on what KDE3 people expect if they use the 11.2 DVD, because since version 4 is higher than 4 they will get an update of their KDE3 to 4.

...

...

The metaproblem, however, is more general, not only kde 3 or 4: that bugs in current release should be fixed, even if it is in the OBS.

I cannot speak for other projects but KDE3 is a dead end and not part of the next release so that makes its priority very low. Using OBS packages does not increase that assessment.

Dead end or not, you can not break kde3 on purpose and believe we we'll be happy with it.

It's OBS you can always use the package from your DVD.

It is a new bug that has been introduced, not an old one, packaging something for kde3 and replacing it with a kde4 package, silently, instead of leaving it alone.

IMHO they should not have packaged it in the first place and just pull that package. If the KDE3 community wants updated packages in OBS, let them package them, there are packaging workshops offered for those interested. Sven -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 8:15 AM, Sven Burmeister wrote:

IMHO they should not have packaged it in the first place and just pull that package. If the KDE3 community wants updated packages in OBS, let them package them, there are packaging workshops offered for those interested.

Or split the KDE:Backports into KDE3:Backports and KDE4:Backports to ensure that this doesn't happen and that the 2 KDE releases are seperated. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Saturday 11 April 2009 07:04:20 Sven Burmeister wrote:

KDE3 will be community maintained, so if there is a KDE3 community, it will fix bugs. I think it makes sense that openSUSE focuses its resources on the products that are part of the 11.2 release.

Sven

Oddly enough, though, they won't even fix some of the bugs in their own code that prevent use of some of the hardware that the OS itself can see. See bug 494216, where we find that YaST2 and Sax2 (only they can fix them) have serial devices hard-coded in their selection lists; so if the device that one has attached does not appear on the list it cannot be configured, even though the OS receives data from it. SuSE support tells me that my case is not worth fixing, apparently without even looking to see how much work it would take: their response came back within 2 minutes, putting the bug in the NOTFIX category. Leslie -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

I'm guessing that there is no way to protest having one's bug report arbitrarily deemed "not worth fixing"? I don't see a way to do it. Does Novell have an ombudsman for their bugzilla? Leslie -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Saturday 11 April 2009 07:43:11 pm Rajko M. wrote:

/etc/xorg.conf

/etc/X11/xorg.conf -- Regards, Rajko -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Richard wrote:
> On Fri April 10 2009 2:23:18 pm Anders Johansson wrote:
>> On Friday 10 April 2009 19:54:02 David C. Rankin wrote:
>>> Listmates,
>>>
>>> 	I'm a bit troubled by the current "Sweep the bug under the rug" philosophy
>>> I am seeing all too often with bugzilla. Latest example is:
>>>
>>> https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488463
>>>
>>> 	Why not fix the easy ones? The point/question being, "What justifies
>>> leaving openSuSE broken when the fix is simple?"
>>>
>>> 	It has always been "attention to detail" that has set SuSE/openSuSE apart,
>>> why change course?
>> 1. That is the build service, not openSUSE.
>> 2. It's not a bug. The developer ported his package to KDE4
>> 3. You did not get that package through online update. Online update is for 
>> official patches, not build service packages. You got it from the build 
>> service
>> 4. You have the answer already, the newer versions are for kde4, so if you 
>> want to use kde3, you need to keep using the older version of the package. 
>> Whatever you may think, SUSE developers cannot backport all new packages that 
>> are written for kde4 to kde3.
>>
>> So stick with the older version of the package
>>
>> Anders
> 
> Bull-Hockey
> 
> The OBS is part of the openSuSE structure, maintained by openSuSE.org, provided as a SERVICE and is a form of distribution, used (if we are to believe anything we read in these mail lists) to create the last distribution and presumably the upcoming release(s) and probably many of the included applications and other programs and libraries used by openSuSE and the versions of DE's like KDE and others.   So when something breaks something in the OBS you are breaking support mechanism for already released versions that haven't even reached EOL yet.   
> 
> This idea of "OFFICIAL" openSuSE updates is very nebulous at best.   First, it is very ill defined.   Second, it often breaks existing released code.   Third, often the fix is 'WONTFIX' ostensibly because of lack of resources or interest or simple laziness.   
> 
> Telling people to 'Stick with the older version of the package' is tantamount to saying "We know there are other bugs in our software that we will fix and release in the future, but you won't be able to use them because you took our advice and are stuck with the older (buggy) version of the package".   Their only alternative is to upgrade....which some can't do because of hardware or in a lot of cases, incompatibility with applications that cannot or will not be upgradeable but required in their business or other activities.   Thus, they are stuck with the bugs that are fixed but out of reach because they took your advice.
> 
> David is right, you could have spent much less time by making the simple fix he showed you instead of making excuses and lame advice.   
> 
> 
> 
> Richard
> 

What Richard said.

Besides, David did an update which BROKE his application.

Why offer an upgrade that is broken, and then suggest on a mailing list that he should have
stayed with the prior release?

Why offer broken updates at all?  Especially when the bugzilla report notified the dev that
there was breakage, and the answer was won't fix.  If you won't fix it then remove then have the
courtesy to remove the broken package.  Leaving it there to break other users installations
is no better than malware.


-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Richard wrote:

Bull-Hockey

The OBS is part of the openSuSE structure, maintained by openSuSE.org, provided as a SERVICE and is a form of distribution, used (if we are to believe anything we read in these mail lists) to create the last distribution and presumably the upcoming release(s) and probably many of the included applications and other programs and libraries used by openSuSE and the versions of DE's like KDE and others. So when something breaks something in the OBS you are breaking support mechanism for already released versions that haven't even reached EOL yet.

This idea of "OFFICIAL" openSuSE updates is very nebulous at best. First, it is very ill defined. Second, it often breaks existing released code. Third, often the fix is 'WONTFIX' ostensibly because of lack of resources or interest or simple laziness.

Telling people to 'Stick with the older version of the package' is tantamount to saying "We know there are other bugs in our software that we will fix and release in the future, but you won't be able to use them because you took our advice and are stuck with the older (buggy) version of the package". Their only alternative is to upgrade....which some can't do because of hardware or in a lot of cases, incompatibility with applications that cannot or will not be upgradeable but required in their business or other activities. Thus, they are stuck with the bugs that are fixed but out of reach because they took your advice.

David is right, you could have spent much less time by making the simple fix he showed you instead of making excuses and lame advice.

Richard

Richard, I couldn't have said it better. This excuse of "it's build service" doesn't wash at all. I know that's crap from personal experience. I too have built packages for build service, and the very instance when somebody had a bug report concerning my madwifi package, Marcus personally forwarded the bug to me to handle and fix. Your code, your bugs -- fix it. If I'm required to fix bugs with the packages I build for build service, why in the heck isn't Joachim Eibl required to fix his? What makes this instance even more acute is the blatant admission that it was due to a bleeping mistake of building the kde3 kdiif3 package against kde4 -- whoops! Fix-it! See: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488463 If you're man enough to build for build service, then you need to be man enough to fix your bugs or pull your packages so they don't cause other openSuSE users grief and wasted time -- period. The text of bugzilla.novell currently reads: <quote> Severity "Normal: It's a bug that should be fixed." </quote> If all we are going to do is make excuses for why we won't fix things, then the text needs to be changed to honestly read: Severity "Normal: It's a bug that should be fixed but probably won't if it's build service." This entire scenario is evidence of a growing problem with the way bugs in *anything* other than the most recent release are treated. With SuSE it did not matter which current release the bug related to. As long as the release had not reached EOL, it was approached with the attitude of "Well, let's see what is going on here and see if we can get it fixed." With openSuSE, the new mentality seems to be "it's Build Service, not "OFFICIAL" openSuSE, so take a hike!" Loosely translated "If it's not the most recent release and the fix doesn't directly impact upstream SLES or SLED, WON'T FIX." That is so contrary to making sure the current releases are not broken by botched updates it defies everything written in the openSuSE Guiding Principles, namely: We are... a project for everybody striving for an open free software distribution that enables all computer users to reach their individual goals. ... focused on three main areas: openSUSE Build Service Free software is driven by diversity and engagement of individuals. This is supported by the openSUSE Build Service. We want to... ... create the best Linux distribution in the world, which has the largest user community, and provide the primary source for getting free software. ... create a distribution which is stable, easy to use and a complete multi-purpose distribution for users and developers, for desktop and server use, for beginners and experienced users, for everybody. We value... ... *quality* by striving for technically excellent solutions based on a solid and transparent development process. We achieve that by focusing on providing thorough solutions to problems, taking the needs of users seriously, and maintaining stability through well-defined quality assurance processes. ... *our users*, their desires and goals, their need for help when encountering problems and their support for our common project. We listen to our users and focus on their needs throughout all our activities. We consider our users to be part of our community. IS ALL THIS JUST WINDOW DRESSING?? Why do we seem to constantly get back arguments regarding fixing simple things that seem to violate the very core of what the community was promised when novell gobbled up SuSE? I mean I like the guiding principles, I read them when I was required to adopt them and, above all, this distribution would work if we just kept them in mind and revisited them every once in a while. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. Rankin Law Firm, PLLC 510 Ochiltree Street Nacogdoches, Texas 75961 Telephone: (936) 715-9333 Facsimile: (936) 715-9339 www.rankinlawfirm.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Tuesday 14 April 2009 08:53:44 I wrote:

I have no idea what you're talking about here. There is no technical way to "build a kde3 package against kde4". The problem is in the name. kdiff3 now, despite the name, is a kde4 package. Version 0.90 was the last kde3 version, later versions are kde4. Not "kde3 built against kde4", but actually ported to kde4. You cannot build them against kde3, the code has changed.

This is the point. The kde3 version should have stayed at version 0.90, and later versions should have been renamed something like kde4-kdiff3

For 0.90, read 0.92. I was typing from memory there. The last kde3 version was 0.92, later ones are kde4 Anders -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Tuesday 14 April 2009 13:02:15 Carlos E. R. wrote:

Probably; but apparently, more packages are affected. Yesterday Richard mentioned a similar problem in konqueror which forced him to go back a version to repair functionality (3.5.10 to 3.5.9). It appears that kde3 in the OBS is broken.

I've tested this on 11.1 now, and I don't see the issue with konqueror that he talked about. I'm in the middle of updating an 11.0 now, so maybe it's a problem there, but konqueror in 3.5.10 for 11.1 is not "kde4-ified" Anders -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 8:32 AM, Anders Johansson wrote:

I have now tested the update on 11.0 as well, and there is no "kde4-ishness" in konqueror in 3.5.10. The only issue I saw was a dependency issue that forced me to uninstall digikam, but that was it.

So without more info, I'm forced to conclude CLOSED/INVALID

So, just because you can't reproduce it means that it's not reproducable for someone else? Since when is it that easy? Wouldn't the next step be to ask for more info from the affected user? Maybe he's got something else going on that caused the bug to happen? I had an issue with KNetworkManager recently and found out it was an update from the Build Service. After removing the problem and removing the build service, I can use KNetworkManager to connect to wireless networks. Is the BuildService considered Official or not? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Wednesday 15 April 2009 21:12:03 Larry Stotler wrote:

On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 8:32 AM, Anders Johansson wrote:

...

I have now tested the update on 11.0 as well, and there is no "kde4-ishness" in konqueror in 3.5.10. The only issue I saw was a dependency issue that forced me to uninstall digikam, but that was it.

So without more info, I'm forced to conclude CLOSED/INVALID

So, just because you can't reproduce it means that it's not reproducable for someone else? Since when is it that easy? Wouldn't the next step be to ask for more info from the affected user? Maybe he's got something else going on that caused the bug to happen?

I thought that's what I did. Note that this is a mailing list, not bugzilla, nor am I the developer in charge of packaging 3.5.10 I didn't see anything that resembled kde4 in 3.5.10, neither in 11.1 nor in 11.0. I haven't heard any details though Anders -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 2:53 AM, Anders Johansson wrote:

I have no idea what you're talking about here. There is no technical way to "build a kde3 package against kde4". The problem is in the name. kdiff3 now, despite the name, is a kde4 package. Version 0.90 was the last kde3 version, later versions are kde4. Not "kde3 built against kde4", but actually ported to kde4. You cannot build them against kde3, the code has changed.

Then why not PULL the package until it's fixed? If the contributor isn't responding, then his work isn't worth having. How long has this been going on?

This is the point. The kde3 version should have stayed at version 0.92, and later versions should have been renamed something like kde4-kdiff3

Ok, then can that be done and the zypper links fixed so that if you have KDE3 installed it is ignored? I have no idea how a lot of this is done. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Cristian Rodríguez pecked at the keyboard and wrote:

Larry Stotler escribió:

...

Then why not PULL the package until it's fixed? If the contributor isn't responding, then his work isn't worth having. How long has this been going on?

The contributor is not obligated to fix it, may have a life, wife , kids, real life problems, who knows.. anyway, OBS repositories may be broken at anytime and are _NOT_ supported by SUSE in anyway.

Could something be setup that if a package in OBS _is_ broken and the contributer won't fix it for whatever reason it can removed? At least that way people will not be installing broken packages and I think most could live with that. If I could program I would probably help in that regard with health conditions dictate otherwise. I do try with the few bug reports I submit. -- Ken Schneider SuSe since Version 5.2, June 1998 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Hi Dan! Dan Goodman wrote:

David C. Rankin wrote:

...

Listmates,

... It has always been "attention to detail" that has set SuSE/openSuSE apart, why change course? ...

It was precisely this "attention to detail" that first attracted me to SuSE Linux, after first working professionally with RedHat. And this is the reason my team-mates in a strong SuSE Linux shop like SuSE in general, and openSUSE in particular, the fact that it is better-engineered and there is more attention to details.

"Whatever it takes" should/must be the way to keep that.

I have a very busy life now, as I'm sure many others of do, but I have coded more than a little professionally, and am trying to gradually work my way into being more active in support of Linux. Specifically, I have gravitated to SuSE because of the quality, and the engineering.

So I encourage the "best and brightest", as well as the "foot soldiers" of the community, to constantly strive to make the extra effort that it takes to make and keep this distro at the front of the pack.

And I am willing to help to contribute as well, when and if I can find a way to do so that is both meaningful and useful, and that doesn't require lots of time and/or immediate response. Given those two caveats, if anyone on the list is willing to point me in the direction of where some good "entry level" community support opportunities are, I will consider putting my hand to the plow.

I know enough of the history of Linux, and Unix before it, to realize that some really good distros have fallen by the wayside. Likewise, without mentioning names, some quite popular distros have advanced, and have made contributions to the entire Linux community, but still have not attained the level of quality and systems integration that this distro has.

And that is one of the reasons I come down hard on some of the things that I see, not because I like to complain (although perhaps I do, sometimes), but because I have already lived through the loss of one really good OS (OS/2) (well, you could also count DEC and CDC OS's, but...), and now have openSUSE Linux as the first, and only, OS I have found that is as useful to me as OS/2 was. And yes, I have worked enough with several other major (and lesser-know) distros, enough to know the reason why I am working with, and agonizing over, openSUSE.

We in the openSUSE community truly have a unique situation and opportunity. This is my "halftime pep talk"...to myself as well as to our community. Let us not forget what we have, and what it takes to get and keep us there.

Thanx for your support! :O)

Speaking for myself, I am going to start looking at some of the bugs that people are complaining aren't getting fixed for reasons of time, and see if they look like something that I could handle. And if so, I will be reaching out further to try to get involved.

In the meantime, FWIW, I am a half-way decent c programmer, can and have worked with C++ a bit, and have experience in several software development efforts, from one person projects to global teams. So, if anyone has any ideas that are on the order of 3-6 hours a week of commitment, plus or minus, please make a suggestion (besides spending less time writing posts and more time writing code...<G>).

Nice! I've got a few :O) If you like zypper (it's C++) and do not mind using git, take a look at http://en.opensuse.org/Zypper/Bugs_For_Adoption . If you're instrested, i can help you start. But hey, choose it only if it will be fun/rewarding for you :O) -- cheers, jano Ján Kupec YaST team ---------------------------------------------------------(PGP)--- Key ID: 637EE901 Fingerprint: 93B9 C79B 2D20 51C3 800B E09B 8048 46A6 637E E901 ---------------------------------------------------------(IRC)--- Server: irc.freenode.net Nick: jniq Channels: #zypp #yast #suse #susecz ---------------------------------------------------------(EOF)---