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for outdated versions increases our workload.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.
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
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
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.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kde+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-kde+help(a)opensuse.org