Am Sonntag, 18. Juli 2010, 13:53:23 schrieb Markus Slopianka:
I agree that blindly updating platform components (eg. KDE SC, GNOME, GTK, Qt, glibc,..) can be risky, but completely separate apps?
You might have a point, yet this is something for an IRC meeting and after that the opensuse-project mailinglist.
openSUSE 11.2 (and I'd guess SLED as well) ships an *ALPHA* release of K3b 2.0! (officially numbered 1.6x) Countless bugs have been fixed since then. All bug reports we from K3b get for outdated versions increases our workload.
Does it not use the KDE3 k3b as default?, AFAIR it was shipped as well. And I agree that default packages that were shipped as non-final versions should get official updates to the final version.
And distros like debian do not do version updates for their stable releases either. openSUSE is not a rolling distro, so one would have to push it that way if one wants those kind of updates.
I think you don't know what a rolling distro is. I never wrote that openSUSE should adopt new major versions (eg. K3b 2.1). Rolling distros do that. But is a distributor decides to ship a pre-release (!!) of some package, there should be at very least be willingness to upgrade to an official stable release.
I agree, so what are the differences between what 11.3 ships and 2.0, i.e. the official stable release?
I think I'll get in touch with Fedora/Red Hat, Mandriva, and Kubuntu. If they have the same upstream-hurting policy, I'll suggest to my fellow K3b team members to scrap to whole stable branch altogether. Unlike Novell (or Red Hat or any other commercial distributor) we don't have paid developers.
Sounds a bit dramatic. KDE has a stable branch, digikam, any other package but they seem to cope with it and not have that serious issues with downstream.
We created a stable branch out of consideration for distributions to give them a safe place to update from. If our work (or to be more precise: Michal's work, because he's the programmer -- I'm just a guy who lends a hand where he can such as going through bug reports) isn't appreciated, why should we do it anyway? So if distribution-internal policies hurt us, downstream should assign someone to watch all commits into K3b trunk and hand-pick patches individually.
I think you throw out the baby with the bath water. As if those distros did not offer packages of your stable branch. They do and they ship them by default if their release cycle allows them to. The fact that alphas and RCs were shipped was also due to 2.0 taking that long and distros moving to KDE4. So for the future this won't be an issue because there is a stable version available for KDE4 no matter what release cycle a distro has. Sven -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kde+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-kde+help@opensuse.org