Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-features (199 mails)

< Previous Next >
[openFATE 308180] Development versions of packages include in openSUSE release notes
Feature changed by: Tomáš Chvátal (scarabeus_iv)
Feature #308180, revision 8
Title: Development versions of packages include in openSUSE release

openSUSE-11.3: Rejected by Andreas Jaeger (a_jaeger)
reject date: 2010-11-08 16:44:13
reject reason: Not done for 11.3.
Requester: Important

openSUSE-11.4: Rejected by Karl Cheng (qantas94heavy)
reject reason: Not done in time for 11.4.
Requester: Mandatory

- openSUSE Distribution: New
+ openSUSE Distribution: Rejected by Tomáš Chvátal (scarabeus_iv)
+ reject date: 2017-06-26 14:03:31
+ reject reason: We are really not planning to generate release notes
+ like this. But we Include changelog diff between the products so users
+ can read up what changed.
Requester: Desirable

Requested by: Peter Gumbrell (gumb)
Partner organization:

With regard to the inclusion of packages in distros that are 'not
intended for end users', and the recent controversies such as the KDE
4.0 release in openSUSE 11.0 (and probable future issues with such
things as KOffice 2.0 in openSUSE 11.2), I propose a way to keep
'regular users' better informed of this advice, which is sometimes not
dispensed with clarity or through the right channels. I have copied
this suggestion to the forums for further feedback. I suggest that all
packages known to be in an alpha, beta or other development state are
noted as such in some single, central place. The Release Notes might be
a good place for this, as it would allow last-minute inclusions, and
also ensure the majority of users would be informed during the
installation process. There wouldn't need to be too much detail, just a
simple list with perhaps a brief, optional summary of the state of each
relevant package. The below is my example of how it might read. There
might be legal or technical implications to be taken into account. ==
Alpha, beta and development versions of software packages
openSUSE distribution releases sometimes include development versions
of certain software packages. This can be due to a number of reasons,
such as compatibility with other software or hardware. These programs
may be lacking some features, designed for testing use, or may be
unstable and not recommended for regular users. Other packages may be
relatively stable, but labelled as 'beta' or 'development version' on
an almost permanent basis, because of ongoing changes and improvements.
Throughout the product lifecycle of openSUSE releases, updates to
packages are made available through the 'Software Update' mechanism.
From time to time, these may include final versions of packages
previously provided as development versions in the original
distribution. The following list summarizes packages contained in this
release that are known to be 'development' versions. It is intended as
a guide for users who might not wish to run unstable versions of
software. The list is not exhaustive and there may be some omissions.
Kaffeine 0.9pre2* - Latest development release. Included for better
stability than alternative versions. K3B alpha3* - Latest development
release. Included for better stability than alternative versions.
KOffice 2.02* - Development release. Not intended for end users.
Kompozer 0.8a4*** - Bugfix / development release, included for
compatibility purposes. SeaMonkey 2.0RC2** - Bugfix release. Should be
stable for most purposes. Thunderbird 3.0b4 - Bugfix release. Should be
stable for most purposes. * Not included on GNOME Live CD ** Not
included on KDE Live CD *** Included on DVD version only == Obviously,
my own list is just a mock-up and probably incorrect anyway. Perhaps
there would even be a way to automate the generation of this list by
assessment of package names (rather hopeful I suppose). There could
also be a link to a wiki page on, though this assumes
users have an Internet connection and hence I don't see it as so
practical. Is this idea practical or possible for 11.2?

#1: Peter Gumbrell (gumb) (2009-10-21 21:16:38)
Urgh! The formatting applied to my post is horrid. It should be laid
out better than that. See my forum post for a better and easier to read


openSUSE Feature:

< Previous Next >
This Thread