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