On Thursday 29 September 2011 14:29:44 Stephan Kulow wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 29. September 2011 schrieb Ilya Chernykh:
On Thursday 29 September 2011 16:14:12 Stephan Kulow wrote:
Stephan, I am sure Trinity lacks behind of us in some respects. For example, they still need hal. Most patchs are ported from us to Trinity than other way around.
Then I would say your promise to have an active upstream are faulty.> > > They are active and we watch all their patches.
But I still don't get why they would maintain kmess and kbear if they are already not getting over hal. When you talked initially about KDE3, I thought you're talking about the desktop.
They have more applications than KDE 3.5.10 had but less than we in KDE:KDE3.
What they "have" I don't care about, I care what they maintain. You know, I'm the guy who WONTFIXed a guessed value of quatro trillion thousand KDE bugs because they don't apply to KDE4. So I don't want KDE:KDE3 in factory, I agreed to have a KDE3 desktop. I don't see why we need to have all the koffice1 bugs back.
On top of that, you say you're not using factory - so you're doing a complete wild shot in submitting all these 2008 spec files. To summarize: limit yourself to a basic desktop you can **maintain** together with the Trinity guy. Until these and the issues I mentioned are sorted out, I'm against submitting any further KDE3 packages. Therefore, I declined those that are currently open (for the reasons mentioned).
However, I am unsure on how to threat those packages that already moved into Factory. -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Sascha Peilicke