On Sun, Nov 21, 2004 at 02:44:08AM +0100, Frederik Dannemare wrote: > On Friday 19 November 2004 01:42, Colin Watson wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 06:26:20PM -0600, Chris Cheney wrote: > > > kdepim will probably need to stop following policy wrt building > > > static libs to be able to build at all on s390. It seems fairly > > > pathetic that the s390 has the smallest diskspace of all the > > > buildds including m68k's. Is it ok that KDE does not produce static > > > libraries, only kdepim does currently and just started with 3.3.0. > > > > That's fine by me personally; I think this is a minor and justifiable > > infraction. > Any chance you and the other release managers can be persuaded to change > your mind with regards to KDE in Sarge? Any reasons left for not > letting 3.3.x in now that it is getting in good shape, or do you still > foresee a lot of breakage as was Andreas Barth's initial reason for not > letting it propagate to testing? > Knowing that GNOME 2.8.x has been given the green light, I think it is > safe to say that a fair share of KDE users probably will feel a bit > "let down" not having a more recent KDE in Sarge. > Being a KDE user myself I hope the release team will look at the > KDE/Sarge matter again, and hopefully we'll have Bug#266478 closed > sooner rather than later. KDE 3.3 in sarge is contingent on the KDE maintainers being able to provide the same sort of assurances that were asked of the GNOME maintainers regarding the safety of allowing these packages to trickle in (i.e., the correctness of the package relationships), which calls for comprehensive partial upgrade testing. I understand that kparts makes the package relationships more complex than those expressed in shlibs alone. This is one concrete reason I know of why testing of partial upgrades is called for -- though of course, there may be other reasons I don't know about, as well. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature