kdepim4.5

[José Matos]

On Monday 05 July 2010 21:21:16 Anne Wilson wrote:
> I do resent being called a liar - I have never deliberately told any lie,
> nor  have I tried to ruin your reputation.  The conversation you quoted
> was not even on a user channel, so if you had not chosen to quote it, most
> people would not have seen the mistake.  It would have been more kind and
> honest to tell me that I had made a mistake, instead of using insulting
> language against me in this way.
> 
> I have been told that I must not help users on Fedora channels in future,
> so I  will have rather more time for my other interests.

Please note that mailing list are always bad to express any feeling. During 
any flamewar, such as this thread was, there are words that attain an 
unbounded expression.

Not only that but the real semantics of any word is even difficult to discern 
during the heat of the discussion. To talk is a tricky business. :-)

IMHO opinion this discussion goes like this, people have been burned during 
the 4.0 transition. Now that a structural desktop component is taking a 
similar transition that fear showed up again. kdepim-libs is an important 
component and one where some mistakes can mean a dataloss and that is not 
something to take light-heartily by any means. Some previous changes in the 
kdepim had showed that some of the assumptions made by developers like the 
removal of contact lists without an effective replacement were miscalculated 
(to say the least).

At the same time the developers need real cases uses to test the changes, it 
is not enough to test it with simple cases. As far as I understand from what I 
read this has been the case, the upgrade tools allows to left the previous 
configuration in place in case there is a need to downgrade.

In any case to complain here is the wrong place, kde-redhat is the (virtual) 
messenger. Assuming that the developers had asked for the testing of the new 
packages kde-redhat is continuing its path to better integrate kde into fedora 
(and derivatives).

This is how I read this whole thread but, as usual, I assume that I can be 
wrong. :-)

Regards,
-- 
José Abílio