Am Sonntag, 16. September 2012, 20:31:16 schrieb Christian Trippe:
I also want a rock stable release although I am using KDF all the time, but e.g. my wife is using a plain installation without additional repos (except packman of course). And I still would claim this is true for the majority of users. So Martin is not alone with his goal.
I never said that he is alone. I just claim that most people contributing to KDE packaging do not use STABLE etc. And I doubt that the last openSUSE versions were rock solid regarding KDE. Actually, using KRxy people were better off if they use "all" KDE has to offer, e.g. KDEPIM.
I claim you are wrong. I am quite sure nobody will reject a version update for pnm and would want that you only have single backported patches, if you have a good argument for the update. This update simply did not happen because nobody submitted a fixed package. (This of course may be related to your impression about the time of the employed KDE team, which I share. But nothing has stopped you from submitting a updated package on your own.)
This proves my point. The community quickly provided packages for the repos it uses. After that work is done, it's done. There was/is nobody left to submit those packages from KDF to openSUSE – not even the paid staff, e.g. the one who accepted the SR to KDF for pnm, not within weeks until today. Pick your reason, bottom-line is: those SR/updates don't happen. As I stated, I am not willing to go through the extra work which is put on contributors. I contribute to KRxy because IMO that's the repo openSUSE users should use for KDE. One might improve its "security" by keeping old versions of packages allowing user to revert.
"openSUSE stable" is nice in theory but lacks commitment by paid openSUSE employees as you also stated. And IMHO the community contributing to the KDE repos has a different schedule than openSUSE, i.e. upstream. Hence you would force people to work on something they do not use and leave behind as soon as the next upstream release is out.
I hope that you are wrong at this point, because if this is true for KDE this is probably also true for many other parts of openSUSE and then the only maintained versions would be Tumbleweed and Factory, which both I would not call stable.
I cannot judge other projects. My impression though is that KRxy repos are stable, in some cases even more stable than STABLE, certainly not less stable. And there are a lot of people who want to contribute to them. Hence why destroy that phenomenon instead of embracing it and supporting them? If there is a need for KDF, that's perfectly fine, use the work done within UNSTABLE and KRxy and improve on it.
I don't want to work on KRxy because I don't think it adds value for the typical user.
That's fine, KDF needs people that submit updates like pnm to the official update channel. Just don't try to force people to work on something they do not want to work on. KRxy has shown that it works very well on its own, not being linked to KDF.
In the end I think you are right with pointing out that within the openSUSE KDE community people have different goals and we have to find a way to work which is the most efficient to reach most of them.
They have already been reached. They work on the projects they use. Just check out KRxy and how well it was established and maintained – almost without any openSUSE staff. There are people updating apps, updating KDE and even submitting important patches from upstream. That's how well the community works – today! The community does work already, just not as the management and those demanding the "openSUSE stable" would like it to. Sven -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kde+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kde+owner@opensuse.org