Re: [KDE 4.1 backports] yakuake missing
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 03:50:02PM -0400, Ben E. Hard wrote:
> Hi Ana,
>
> first of all sorry for the "he"... Meanwhile I realized my mistake and
> apologize for that masculine behaviour of assuming that most of computer
> specialists are men... And thanks for your kde-debian-work.
>
No problem! :)
> Am Donnerstag 04 September 2008 schrieben Sie:
> > On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 09:39:32AM -0400, Ben E. Hard wrote:
> > > Modestas Vainius wrote:
>
> > >
> > > I know that it is only an additional feature and that Ana doesn't want to
> > > provide the "best possible KDE 4.1 desktop experience" in Lenny. But why
> > > shouldn't he or somebody else provide a good experience with some more
> > > KDE4 programs for Lenny?
> >
> > Modax provided you a very good argument about this....
> > If you *really* want the best KDE 4.X desktop experience, you should use
> > now the experimental packages, help reporting (*) and fixing bugs on those
> > packages.
>
> So if I want to report bugs, I should rather use experimental packages (or
> keep them, as they haven't yet been replaced by the backport ones) than the
> backport ones? I'm not able to fix any bugs, as I'm not a developer, but I do
> report bugs. Would it then be the best idea, to switch completely to sid even
> before it becomes testing?
>
Yes, please, only report bugs against experimental packages... *if you are using
them*. If you are using backports packages, then when you have a nasty bug ask
in the mailing list.
Mind that the backports are damned to be *behind* the experimental packages,
since they are backport of these packages. This is good because more grave
issues are detected in these packages and fixes are already in the backports
when they are made. But even after backports are made, more grave issues
can be reported and fixed only in experimental. Or how it is the case currently,
experimental contains 4.1.1 and backports are 4.1.0.
In the end of you mail you got this, but i still wanted to expand a bit the
reasons :)
> > (*) no packaging bugs should go to bugs.kde.org if you want to be helpful
> That is one thing, I never really understood: how do I know if a bug is a
> packaging bug or one which should be reported upstream? (of course there are
> evident ones like missing libaries, but what, if the application crashes for
> example?)
I understand your concern in this, and I agree sometimes it is not easy. So
you have to try applying common sense here, with time hopefully you learn and know
where you have to report it.
In my opinion, crashes (with backtraces [1]), should be sent to upstream that
in this case is at http://bugs.kde.org , because people there is using very
different distros so if the crash is caused by a very specific problem in a
distros, users from another distros will tell you it works for them and you
will have a good argument when reproting the problem in your distro. Sometimes
it is caused by a specific version of a dependecy, and reporting to upstream
also helps.
[1]
http://techbase.kde.org/Development/Tutorials/Debugging/How_to_create_useful_crash_reports
Ana
Reply to: