On Wednesday 09 March 2005 21:48, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> > > does the working kontact include a working kmail component?
> > > (working kmail is critical for me)
> >
> > kmail segfaulting sounds release critical anyway...
> > Wrapping it in kontact should not be a requirement.
>
> whoa, what a big boy, you know the expression « release critical » clap
> clap... today's lesson will be to learn what a release critical bug
> really is ...
>
> in release critical , there is the word release (oh yeah, there is !!!)
> and do you know what ? our 3.4.0-0pre1 packages are ... not released !
> even not uploaded to experimental. so your RC thing is quite offensive
> for our (the debian qt-kde team) work, that is quite heavy.
the "debian developers reference" _defines_ RC as any bug of severity
critical, grave or serious, a classification this bug seams to fall qualify
for. (AIUI the preview packages are on alioth instead of in experimental
because most/large part of the debian-kde people are still in NM and are
thus unable to upload to experimental without a sponsor? Since the same
classification applies to packages in experimental, it's not much of a
stretch to apply it to the preview packages, even tough the resulting
classification-name is a misnomer in this case)
-> he was merely using the term as outlined by Debian's documentation, and
thus most likely didn't mean offense.
> Moreover, if you read my mail more carefuly (in fact, just read it and
> not half of it should be enough) you'll see :
> > > > * kdepim is not packaged atm, and kmail segfaults (but kontact
> > > > works fine, so whole KDE remains fully stable).
ah that's the info I was looking for :-), thanks
might be an idea to put this (and similar known gotchas) into a README file
on the alioth archive? (Note: suggestion only, not meant in any way to
reflect negatively on the great work you guys have been doing with the
debian kde packaging)
> If you don't understand what the difference of preview packages (even
> not experimental) and stable ones ... then I cannot do anything for
> you. but keep in mind that our work need quite a big amount of time,
> and that such offending remarks are not welcome.
ouch, please cool down, as explained above there's a (at the very least
feasible) non-offending interpretation of what frans wrote,
IME most people do _not_ the intend to offend most of the time, hence it's
usually best to interpret things in a non-offending way if possible.
Especially since this:
(a) severely irritates those few that do intend offense :)
(b) avoids scaring away random users that happened to inadvertently phrase
things in a way that struck a chord
(c) projects a much more positive atmosphere to those uninvolved (which
makes them more likely to get involved)
--
Cheers, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
1. Encrypted mail preferred (GPG KeyID: 0x86624ABB)
2. Plain-text mail recommended since I move html and double
format mails to a low priority folder (they're mainly spam)
Attachment:
pgpau_x7cbzF0.pgp
Description: PGP signature