[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: KDE SC 4.5.1 packages available



Just finished installing it and things already feel faster (could just be placebo effect...) - thanks for your great work!

On Thursday 09 September 2010 12:57:14 pm George Kiagiadakis wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Semi-official KDE SC 4.5.1 packages are now available at
> http://qt-kde.debian.net/. Enjoy!
> 
> Unfortunately not all of the packages are ready yet, so you may notice
> that some things are missing. The missing source packages at the
> moment are kdeaccessibility, kdeadmin, kdegames, kdemultimedia,
> kdebindings, kdetoys, kdewebdev and kde-l10n as well as meta-kde (the
> kde-standard and misc metapackages). Despite this, you can upgrade
> everything else just fine from your existing KDE SC 4.4.5 using the
> instructions given on that site.
> 
> Once all the packages are prepared and working, we plan to release
> them to Debian experimental. Until then, any updates or new prepared
> packages will go to this repository.
> 
> We appologize for the long delay since 4.5.0 was released, but I hope
> you understand the reasons behind this (getting squeeze ready, work,
> real life, summer vacations, few active people in the team, etc...)
> 
> To all the people out there that offered to help: We appreciate your
> offer and we appologise for the lack of proper documentation.
> Packaging KDE SC is not an easy task and newcomers are usually advised
> to try packaging something smaller first, like something from
> kde-apps.org. We will try to make things better in the future, by
> documenting better our workflows and policies. If you still would like
> to help, as you can see, there is still work to do. Besides packaging,
> there are other things you could do, such as update copyright files
> (which I find easier, but more time-consuming).
> 
> Best regards,
> George
> 
> 
> PS: Please read well the instructions and please report packaging bugs
> only here and on irc, not on the debian bug tracking system. Thanks in
> advance.
> 
> 
> 


Reply to: