Harmless KDE feature upgrades - yeah right

[Jaroslav Reznik]

On Thursday 04 March 2010 15:30:43 Juha Tuomala wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > current stable release nor support an official backports repo, an
> > unofficial one will no doubt spring up, or an existing unofficial repo
> > will pick up that role (for KDE, kde-redhat stable would probably be
> > revived, currently it's mostly empty for Fedora as the kind of stuff
> > which would be in there is usually just pushed as official Fedora
> > updates).
> 
> Go ahead, make that to your kde-hardcore-followers-repo. In my
> understanding, that's what it has been for past years already
> anyway.

Third party repos are highway to hell unfortunately. Ask former OpenSuse users 
:( Of course - it's one of solutions. 

> > I would argue having this within Fedora infrastructure would be better as
> > it would prevent proliferation of third-party repos replacing Fedora
> > packages and the resulting compatibility issues (see e.g. the chaos
> > we're having for RHEL with third-party repositories replacing official
> > packages with newer versions and the resulting dependency hell) and as
> > it would also provide a place for new versions of less commonly-used
> > applications.
> 
> So the thing is that KDE SIG wants to prevent any other activity and
> keep the strings in own hands. That's why nobody can't enjoy the
> upstream's intended stability in bugfix releases and plan major
> upgrades.
> 
> If someone wants to fork, whatever, let them do it. That's why
> Fedora moves to the git, to make it easier.
> 
> > That said, IMHO the best solution is still to have this stuff in the
> > official updates. But it's true that the kind of issues some users are
> > having with KDE 4.4 are unfortunate. This particular Akonadi issue hasn't
> > shown up during testing or it would have been considered a blocker.
> 
> What you've just proved could have been enough for some companies
> trying to run Fedora on their employees desktops and they probably
> think that they've seen enough. TCO is rising too high when you
> cannot do sane stable release updates.

Fedora is not for companies - with one year of lifetime it's not very well 
suited for any long-term deployment. Use Cent OS - it's not I don't want to 
see Fedora there, it's just reality. And Cent OS is just older and more stable 
Fedora...
  
> In other words, SIG's current policy is doing more harm than good
> for Fedora.
> 
> > But I think having yet another thread about update policies will be
> > frowned upon by the moderators. Instead, let's please think about
> > repairing this breakage now that it happened, i.e. get bug reports filed
> > etc.
> 
> Yes, let's fix the bug instead the policy that caused it in the
> first place, sigh.
> 
> 
> Tuju
> 
> --
> Ajatteleva ihminen tarvitsee unta.

-- 
Jaroslav Řezník <jreznik at redhat.com>
Software Engineer - Base Operating Systems Brno

Office: +420 532 294 275
Mobile: +420 731 455 332
Red Hat, Inc.                               http://cz.redhat.com/