critpath approval process seems rather broken

[Kevin Kofler]

Christoph Wickert wrote:
> As someone who is still suffering from the KDE 4.6.1 update and who has
> not received notable support from your or the KDE SIG I object to
> lowering the test requirements for updates.

Uh, we're doing what we can about the Akonadi issues. The thing is, we 
cannot reproduce them, nor could the users who tested 4.6 before we pushed 
it. (We've had even prereleases available in the kde-unstable repository, 
then 4.6.0 and 4.6.1 in kde-testing. Several users tested those. kde-
unstable also had kdepim 4.6, but several people excluded it specifically. 
kde-testing shipped 4.6.0 with kdepim 4.4.10, exactly the combination we 
pushed to F14. The update was also in updates-testing for 11 days total and 
had a karma of +2, with 2 -1 comments about regressions which were both 
fixed in the version we pushed to stable, and 4 +1 comments. One of the +1 
votes was from a proventester, so this update would have fulfilled even the 
stricter requirements for critical path packages.) It's hard to fix an issue 
we cannot reproduce.

We tried a fix from upstream to solve Akonadi-related problems, which wasn't 
developed for your exact issue, but which we thought might have helped too. 
It turns out it didn't help. (It does fix an annoyance other users were 
encountering though.)

We cannot do all that much more on our end. Have you talked to kdepim 
upstream? As far as I know, you actually know the kdepim developers better 
than we do… The upstream developers are the people most likely to be able to 
do anything about your problem. It's hard to fix an issue in code we didn't 
develop.

And aren't you the one who wanted us to ship F15 with kdepim 4.6 beta? (Yes, 
it's still in beta, even now, and I doubt it will be out of beta when F15 
releases. F15 will ship with kdepim 4.4.x.) Yet when I suggested trying that 
to see whether it works any better, you dismissed my suggestion as an insane 
one.

        Kevin Kofler