kdepim4.5

[Anne Wilson]

On Sunday 04 July 2010 22:15:41 Thomas Janssen wrote:
> 2010/7/4 Anne Wilson <cannewilson at googlemail.com>:
> > On Sunday 04 July 2010 13:19:13 Eike Hein wrote:
> >> Keeping the kdepim 4.5 beta out of kde-unstable would create a dange-
> >> rous precedent for the future by hampering what kde-unstable has up
> >> until now been used for, and thus limiting its usefulness for pre-
> >> release testing, and thus limiting testing.
> > 
> > I really can't see what the big deal is.  All we're asking is that you
> > make sure it has a differentiated name - something like kde-pmTP would
> > do it - so that we don't get it as an update, but as a deliberate
> > choice.  What's wrong with that request?  And if you planned to do it
> > anyway, why can't you say so instead of mocking genuine concerns, as
> > several people seem to think is the way to reply
> 
> Why kdepimTP?

A logical suggestion for a Technical Preview, thout it was obviously a 
suggestion which makes your remark fatuous.

> If one don't want to test kdepim4.5 on a testmachine as
> you stated some people have, why have it installed along with
> kdepim4.4?

You know perfectly well that the ability to install alongside is simply that 
either one could be chosen without impact on the rest of the SC.  Of course3 
it doesn't make sense to use both, so why are you suggesting that we are 
idiots?  The packages are tested to make sure they use the same dependencies, 
AIUI.

> If one is afraid of kdepim4.5, what is so hard to use: yum
> --exclude=kdepim update?

A lot - as I already remarked.  Without some form of naming differentiation we 
could not get any bug-fix or security update for kdepim 4.4 if we did that.

> And if i'm willing to test, i want to test everything, including the
> update from 4.4 to 4.5. That's part of testing.
> 
> This whole thread gets slowly ridiculous.
> 
It does indeed, seeing the lengthy fatuous defences and complete refusal to 
give the assurance we need.

> Test it or leave it.

Whether I choose to test it or not is my decision, not yours.  If I can't 
trust Fedora to follow the requests of the developers, I'll go elsewhere.

Anne
-- 
New to KDE4? - get help from http://userbase.kde.org
Just found a cool new feature?  Add it to UserBase
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/kde/attachments/20100704/390a324f/attachment.bin