Re: plasma desktop broken again :(
Am Freitag, 30. Oktober 2015, 10:20:58 CET schrieb Gary Dale:
> On 30/10/15 04:49 AM, Tim Ruehsen wrote:
> > On Friday 30 October 2015 00:09:31 Gary Dale wrote:
> >> On 29/10/15 04:54 PM, Brad Rogers wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 09:54:22 -0400
> >>> Gary Dale <garydale@torfree.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hello Gary,
> >>>
> >>>> And not wanting to rehash that old argument, the current system is
> >>>> clearly not working. Surely all the bright people maintaining Debian
> >>>
> >>> Debian is run by humans. Humans, being humans, make mistakes. It's
> >>> been admitted that libqt5x11extras5 v5.5.1 getting into testing was not
> >>> ideal. Also, reference to this being a corner case. IOW, a situation
> >>> that was difficult, if not impossible, to foresee.
> >>>
> >>>> can come up with something better?
> >>>
> >>> It works the way *they* want it, mistakes notwithstanding. If you don't
> >>> like that method of migration, then maybe Debian testing isn't for you.
> >>> Breakage happens in testing. By and large, not frequently, but it does
> >>> happen. Also, it's not usually such a major issue. To paraphrase a
> >>> well known English saying; "Stuff happens".
> >>
> >> Yes, but it's been happening a LOT this time around. I've been running
> >> Debian Testing for over a decade and don't recall seeing this many major
> >> fails ever.
> >>
> >> If my memory serves me, KDE4 didn't make it into Testing until it was
> >> reasonably complete and stable - somewhere after 4.2 wasn't it? Until
> >> then Testing still had KDE3. Why the push to get KDE5 out when it is
> >> still having massive teething problems?
> >
> > Because we (unstable and/or testing users) want it ASAP :-)
> >
> > Breakages happen all the way, but you should be able to apply workarounds
> > to recover - in this case downgrading libqt5x11extras5.
> > If you don't want (or can't) do that, unstable (and maybe testing) is not
> > a good choice for you.
> >
> > The 'brute force' method would be to use btrfs + snapshots before each
> > upgrade (e.g. done by a little script that automatically removes old
> > shapshots).
> >
> > That is the burden to unstable users - but it also is kind of fun.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Tim
>
> I can understand why "unstable" users may want it, but that doesn't
> those of us using testing are a different breed. We want to help get
> things ready for the next stable release. That means helping to identify
> bugs that could cause problems for people wanting stable software.
Which you can´t do unless you actually receive the new stuff for installing.
Any testing on KDE SC 4.14 does not serve much of a purpose anymore, as
upstream switched over already.
Debian as usual has been later than other distributions, waiting for things to
settle a bit, but at some time there is the time to switch over.
And yes, I do think upstream Plasma 5 and KDE Frameworks, especially KDEPIM
needs further stabilizition work. And that slowing development speed a bit in
favor for more bug fixing could be beneficial.
> We're not in this for the excitement/fun. We're the people who use our
> computers a lot and need stuff that is basically working. That's why we
> make good bug reporters. However we can't report bugs on software that
> doesn't work at all.
I am running Plasma 5 on Unstable for months now and it basically worked
*most* of the time *just* fine. And if it didn´t work it often didn´t take
more than a day or two to work again.
From what I read here I get the impression that testing users tend to have
much more issues due to package migration issues.
Maybe how testing is created needs adjustments, I don´t know. I just notice
that it seems that testing users seem to have more issues than unstable users
when looking at this list. *Or* unstable users don´t write to the list about
issues, but instead just fix / work-around on their own.
That said: No amount of "this should be different" talk on this list will make
any changes happen. Actual work on the change will do.
Thanks,
--
Martin
Reply to: