kdepim4.5

[Thomas Janssen]

2010/7/4 Anne Wilson <cannewilson at googlemail.com>:
> 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.

No, it's not a Technical Preview, but a beta1.  And you better watch
your language. I'm not one of your hutchigutchis.

>> 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.

I'm not suggesting you're idiots, just that you obviously completely
miss the point of kde-unstable, as Eli does.
If i would think you're idiots, i would write it clearly out. I don't
hide anything behind my words. So don't read between the lines but
what i write.

>> 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.

Why not? Do you run rawhide? If not, nobody holds a gun on your head
and says "update to kdepim4.5". We still speak about kde-unstable.

>> 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.

There's no assurance for rawhide or kde-unstable. If one can't/won't
handle it, keep the fingers off. Or i suggest to read *man yum* since
people don't want to accept the already mentioned: yum --exclude

>> 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.

You still don't get it how rawhide and the release cycle or kde-unstable works.
Since it's your decision (and of course it is) wht you test or not,
what we put in our rawhide or kde-unstable is our decision not yours.

-- 
LG Thomas

Dubium sapientiae initium