Am Freitag, 30. Oktober 2015, 17:57:03 CET schrieb Matthias Bodenbinder:
> Full acknowledge!
>
> I am not an early adopter. If I would be somebody who likes bleeding edge
> software with all the risks I would be using sid.I am using debian testing
> because it is supposed to be a good compromise.
>
> I am personally not in agreement with statements like "stuff happens". This
> "love it or leave it" attitude is preventing any continuous improvement
> discussion. And this is for sure: The release process "unstable -> testing"
> has room for improvement.
The *issues* are known.
But a discussion done *here* isn´t going to change anything.
A discussion about testing on debian-devel may lead to some changes,
especially if you would propose a constructive alternative and also offer to
help out to make it happen.
If you do that, first refer to old discussions about always releaseable
testing. This really is no new topic at all.
Its a volunteer effort, so unless you volunteer to help, you can complain as
much as you want, and it is your perfect right to do so, yet, whether someone
else steps up to fix your complaints is *completely* out of your control. It
is every contributor´s perfect right to choose how to allocate the time spend
on Debian work. You have no moral right to decide on how others choose to
spend their free time. And in my view when I complain I often find myself
feeling miserable afterwards, cause I see that my complaining doesn´t
facilitiate change.
There are only a few people doing this packaging work in their free time. As
to my knowledge about no one is being paid for this work. From my impressions
at DebConf I surely got that they work to with best intentions and to the best
of their abilities. You can even just monitor #debian-qt-kde IRC channel for a
while to see what I mean. No one intends to break anything for anyone. Yet,
its a complex matter and people do mistakes at times and due to the way
migrations of packages into testing works the results at times are basically
unpredictable.
>From what I gathered so far, I´d even basically recommend to use unstable for
some time at the moment, at it seems to be far less affected and fixes seem to
come through much quicker. Then settle back to testing at another time.
And in general if testing/unstable is too bumpy for you, use *stable* until
later.
We are still in the development phase for next Debian stable. Debian packagers
want to get in what they want to see in next Debian stable. Nothing has been
frozen yet, so in case you want a slower ride: Wait longer after release of
stable till you switch to testing or unstable.
You can still use tried and tested KDE SC 4.14 if you want it. So if it is to
bumpy to you, use *stable*.
That said I may probably stop discussing here again as in the time I spend
answering here I could have worked on helping the Qt/KDE team to move forward.
I have been busy with lots of other stuff and I didn´t help much. But fully
aware of that I also didn´t complain, cause I do understand that the current
team works to the best of their abilities and I feel gratitude for that. So
unless I see opportunities to help constructively I mostly remain quiet to let
others do their work without urging them spend additional time with my not so
constructive feedback.
And yes, before I close: Testing/unstable has been bumby in the last months.
But the libstcd++ ABI transitions was and still is one of the biggest
transitions Debian ever had. One packager told me that the last time such a
big transition happened for KDE/Plasma was about 10 years ago. Added to that
it wasn´t / isn´t the only transition.
Thanks,
--
Martin