Re: About Testing Freeze and KDE
Le 11 déc. 2014 à 05:10, The Wanderer <firstname.lastname@example.org> a écrit :
> On 12/10/2014 at 03:55 PM, Bob Proulx wrote:
>> B. M. wrote:
>>> Bob Proulx a écrit :
>>> Thanks for the clarification, but in general I think I know how
>>> Debian works. My question was more that I don't see why Debian
>>> should use 4.14.2 or even 4.14.1 if upstream released 4.14.3 as
>>> the last (bug fix) release before porting everything to frameworks.
>>> Maybe this way of thinking is very KDE focused, maybe even on the
>>> current situation, i.e. the transition to "KDE 5".
>>> Put differently, I want to use a stable KDE during the next 2
>>> years. This means KDE 4, not 5. But if upstream releases some bug
>>> fixes (e.g. as 4.14.3), will they get backported to 4.14.2? Wheezy
>>> uses 4.8.4, was that the last one before 4.9? Is everything at
>>> exactly 4.8.4 (except PIM)?
>> I see now you are asking why Testing is frozen. You are asking why
>> you have not yet seen a new KDE release in Testing yet. I think
>> that is the root of your question? Is that right? For the last two
>> years you have been tracking Testing and new releases have been
>> flowing through but now all of a sudden you have stopped seeing new
>> versions appearing in Testing. I think that is what I will read into
>> your questions above. Please correct me if I am wrong.
> Presumably he'll correct me if I'm mistaken, but that is not the
> question I understand him as asking.
> I understood him as asking why freeze testing with a version which
> excludes the latest bug fixes, when a newer version which includes them
> is available. This is not the same as asking why freeze testing with a
> version which is not the newest version.
> IOW, if version 2.2.4 of a program is packaged, and upstream releases
> version 2.3.0 after the freeze, it might be reasonable to stick with
> 2.2.4 in preparing testing for release - but if upstream releases 2.2.5
> as a bugfix release for the 2.2.x line after the freeze (even if
> upstream has not released 2.3.0 yet), shouldn't 2.2.5 be included in
> testing, as part of preparing testing for release?
> I think that's a reasonable sort of question. There might be solid
> answers to it, reasons why it would be better to stick with 2.2.4 rather
> than include 2.2.5 in the release, but so far I don't think the thread
> is providing them.
That's exactly what I was asking for!