kdepim4.5

[Eli Wapniarski]

On Sunday 04 July 2010 22:57:54 Eike Hein wrote:
> On 7/4/2010 6:59 PM, Eli Wapniarski wrote:
> > On Sunday 04 July 2010 15:19:13 Eike Hein wrote:
> >> On 07/04/2010 06:53 AM, Eli Wapniarski wrote:
> >>> It is not unforseable that
> >>> me you or someone else, on purpose or by accident or for whatever
> >>> reason installs kdepim 4.5 on a production desktop.
> >> 
> >> kde-unstable is not for production desktops. If kde-unstable were to
> >> cater to production desktops, it would not be able to fulfill the pur-
> >> pose it currently serves, which is to test software that is expected
> >> to be part of the next Fedora release.
> > 
> > I beg to differ. kde-unstable is branched off into next release and
> > current 2 releases. It is there to test the schedualed to be released as
> > part of the current working versions of Fedora. Otherwise, there would
> > only be a rawhide version (currently F14) which is not the case. kdepim
> > is schedualed never to be released. We may see version 4.5.1. If things
> > go well.
> 
> I found this paragraph to be really hard to parse and
> am not sure if the following will answer the embedded
> questions, but I'll try:
> 
> kde-unstable usually contains builds of rawhide (or
> rawhide-derived, if changes are necessary) specs for
> the current stable releases, thereby allowing users
> of those stable releases to test software that the
> KDE SIG is preparing for the upcoming Fedora release
> without having to test all of rawhide.
> 
> Evidence for that is that kde-unstable frequently
> contains software for which no main repo update for
> the current release is intended to be submitted, e.g.
> KOffice 2.x for the longest time was only there.
> 
> Further confirmation would be found in Kevin Kofler's
> mail in this thread (he's a KDE SIG member) or Thomas
> Janssen's (another KDE SIG member) first mail to his
> thread, where he interpreted your question about
> whether kdepim 4.5 would be fit for the release cycle
> as applying to rawhide.
> 
> I mean, if multiple KDE SIG developers tell you you
> are wrong, isn't that cause to go "huh, maybe I got
> it wrong?" for you?
> 
> I think that addresses your argument that if kde-un-
> stable were for rawhide testing there would only be
> a rawhide branch of it.
> 
> > Eli

I give up. Do what you want. My feeling is its a mistake.

Eli

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.