On Feb 16, 2004 at 21:38, Josh Metzler praised the llamas by saying: > Now to your argument - I agree it doesn't make sense for KDE 3.2 packages to > be available for stable but not for unstable. A final reason for this is > that there are two KDE teams. The stable packages were not made by the > Debian KDE maintainers, but by the KDE project, and they were made using a > snapshot of the incomplete Debian packaging. If you browse the list > archives, you will see that people have had problems with these packages. It > is my understanding that when 3.2 is released to unstable, the stable > backports will be recreated using the updated packaging. In my opinion, it > was inappropriate for KDE to release Debian stable backports using incomplete > packaging, but that was their decision, and that is why 3.2 is available for > stable. > This isn't quite true. The packages available were done aiui, by Ralf Nolden, who is part of the Debian KDE packaging team. The packages are pretty much exactly the same as the final packages available for sid. -- David Pashley david@davidpashley.com Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.
Attachment:
pgp17AlU18IFA.pgp
Description: PGP signature