Re: KDE SC 4.10
On Saturday April 06, 2013 12:07:57 Modestas Vainius wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Friday 05 April 2013 08:42:54 Sune Vuorela wrote:
> > On 2013-04-05, Martin Steigerwald <Martin@lichtvoll.de> wrote:
> > > What was the reason for qt-kde.debian.net then? From the page:
> > Some people thinks experimental is hard. Other people dislike doing the
> > copyright-documentation that is required for the official archive. And
> > qt-kde.d.n also could allow people who isn't a DD/DM to put packages
> > there.
>
> Well, qt-kde.d.n as distribution channel has probably outlived its purpose
> even if it can still be useful sometimes.
>
> The rest of the mail will be a bit OT for this list, however, in my opinion,
> users might still be interested what some of the challenges are with KDE
> packaging. Actually, these are the main things which turn (have turned) me
> off from KDE packaging these days.
>
> IMO, it is very complicated to maintain anything that is more like 5-10
> highly coupled source packages in Debian. You have to spend so much time on
> internal development infrastructure (constantly) that little time (or
> motivation) remains to do actual packaging changes. And as far as I know,
> KDE approaches 100 source packages, so do the math (funtunately, the number
> of core packages is low). Especially, it is very expensive (in terms of
> both time and knowledge required) to start KDE packaging for the first time
> or "resume" work after longer time of inactivity.
>
> I wish there was some "Continuous integration" for KDE packaging which took
> the load of:
>
> * Package building and dependency management.
> * Package uploading to development repository for testing.
> * Automatted Lintian reports and other Q/A.
> * Any other repetitive, boring but useful tasks.
>
Isn't this essentially what Kubuntu's Project Neon is (perhaps was, I'm not
sure)? It means packaging git trunk rather than just tarballs, but that is
probably a good thing.
Sincerely,
Beojan Stanislaus
Reply to: