On Thursday 06 May 2010 14:33:40 Modestas Vainius wrote: > On ketvirtadienis 06 Gegužė 2010 02:13:50 Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: > > > Debian packagers don't have that much time to spend on packaging (they > > > are volunteers after all), and hardly they can do decisions about which > > > particular branch is better. > > > They have to package the last one which has > > > > > > been released, unless has been released very soon and there is no time > > > for testing. > > > > Stable is going to be with those users for at least a year, probably > > more. They deserve more than whatever upstream wants to throw at the wall > > this week. > > Debian users deserve quality packaging of upstream software, good > integration of it throughout the whole distribution and general assumption > that it won't eat their kittens (yet data loss bugs happen). Agreed. > But whether > upstream software meets users' needs is out of Debian scope. Absolutely NOT TRUE. Debian decides what software to include. It largely depends on volunteers to do the packaging and the availability of the source, but Debian does choose not to include software that is inappropriate for stable, either dropping it from testing post-freeze or not uploading it to sid at all. Debian also decides what version(s) of the software to include. When multiple distributions had decided to release with KDE 4.x, Debian Lenny included KDE 3.5.9/10. However, new upstream releases that occur after the freeze date have made it into stable in the past. There's a lot to consider, since Debian needs upstream's help in addressing bugs throughout the lifetime of stable, and that's easier to achieve with the latest release. But then again, stable needs to be usable on release day. "Release early, release often" is great for development, it is not so great for stability (both in "lack of bugs" and "lack of change" meanings). Sometimes the most recent release from upstream is not best for Debian stable. > Just find > another software/solution which does, develop it by yourself, pay somebody > to develop it for you or ask kindly and wait till somebody else is > motivated enough to do it. I will, but I see no reason not to air my grievances. > > > Also, is specially hard to decide which branch is better, because > > > branch A can have application X in a great shape, and application Y in > > > a bad one, while in branch B the case might be the opposite. And having > > > to go back one whole release of the whole software compilation just > > > because one app has one annoying dependency is a little bit overkill, > > > isn't it? > > > > Just block the KDEPIM 4.4 apps from migrating to testing. The KDEPIM 4.3 > > programs already work with the KDEBASE 4.4 libraries. > > > > Heck, just stop *kmail* from migrating. Korganizer and KAddressBook have > > required Akonadi since 4.2 or earlier. > > Move on. kdepim 4.3 is gone. Given that KDE SC 4.5 might release with > kdepim from 4.4 anyway extending kdepim 4.4 codebase lifetime to 1 year, > beating dead horse (4.3) makes absolutely no sense. I recommend you to > face reality here. Wow. Software is dying faster and faster. > > These responses are quite frustrating. I read Ana's post as "please make > > sure KDE 4.4 is ready for stable". My post was "KDE 4.4 is inappropriate > > for stable". All the replies have been "too bad, we are going to release > > it anyway". > > Don't you see that you always put yourself in the front in your rationales? They are mine. I can't speak for others. > YOU run a dozen of DB servers, I'm not the only person that does. Most users have a SQLite datatbase they don't even know about. People that develop or test web applications generally have to deal with a DB as well. In small shops, the test database often lives on the developers work system. > YOU don't want another one, YOU don't trust > MySQL, I'm not the only one with these concerns. > YOU say KDE 4.4 is inappropriate for stable. That is my opinion. > Nothing objective and > YOU assume that your truth is an ultimate one. Not really. I made objective statement about KMail based on observable facts. I also voiced an opinion that I based on that statement. > Pet bugs are always RC to > the reporter, but yet again, we need to face reality here. I've admitted this isn't really a RC bug. > If YOU have so > many problems with particular piece of software, look for better options > or read the first part of this mail again. I have problems with a very narrow selection of selection of the software. Specifically, I don't want to need MySQL installed in order to use KMail effectively in Debian stable. There are a number of solutions to this. Newer Akonadi should run on non- MySQL data stores. Older KMail doesn't talk to Akonadi. Patches could be applied to either. Stable could include software from multiple KDE releases, as has been done before. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. bss@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/ \_/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.