* Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE split ebuilds
2005-03-16 20:29 ` Dan Armak
@ 2005-03-16 21:48 ` Francesco Riosa
2005-03-17 19:03 ` Dan Armak
2005-03-16 22:07 ` Tom Wesley
2005-03-18 16:21 ` [gentoo-dev] " Duncan
2 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Francesco Riosa @ 2005-03-16 21:48 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
Dan Armak ha scritto:
>On Tuesday 15 March 2005 21:25, Tom Wesley wrote:
>
>
>>Hey
>>
>>I've seen several queries regarding KDE's new split ebuilds and the
>>version numbers used for specific packages. It seems that all of the
>>KDE 3.4 packages have been versioned as 3.4.
>>
>>Should kmail, kopete etc not be using their own version numbers with the
>>meta-packages being versioned based on the kde release number?
>>IMO this would make more sense, especially when reading the kopete website,
>>finding the latest version is 0.9.2 and then noticing that portage only
>>has 3.4.
>>
>>
>In my experience most KDE users have no idea offhand what the individual app
>versions are and which versions belong to which kde.org release. They'd be
>confused.
>
>If a lot of users told me I'm wrong, I guess I'd be willing to concede this
>point...
>
>BTW, what do other distros use?
>
>Another problem is that there are a few KDE devs who are the same: they don't
>bother to put real version numbers on their apps (and especially libs), and
>they stay stuck at 0.0.1, or don't always receive a version number upgrade
>when they change. I can't find an example offhand now, but I remember seeing
>such before...
>
>And a third problem: it'd make it much easier for us to make a versioning/dep
>mistake (think about updating 300 differently-schemed version numbers)
>without noticing.
>
>
>
one question only:
one of the point in having a splitted kde was that it make not necessary
upgrade all kde because of a update of a single program.
How do you can achive this mantaining all the packages at the same version?
maybe with -r? versioning ?
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE split ebuilds
2005-03-16 20:29 ` Dan Armak
2005-03-16 21:48 ` Francesco Riosa
@ 2005-03-16 22:07 ` Tom Wesley
2005-03-16 22:17 ` Graham Murray
2005-03-17 19:11 ` Dan Armak
2005-03-18 16:21 ` [gentoo-dev] " Duncan
2 siblings, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Tom Wesley @ 2005-03-16 22:07 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
Dan Armak wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 March 2005 21:25, Tom Wesley wrote:
>
>>Hey
>>
>>I've seen several queries regarding KDE's new split ebuilds and the
>>version numbers used for specific packages. It seems that all of the
>>KDE 3.4 packages have been versioned as 3.4.
>>
>>Should kmail, kopete etc not be using their own version numbers with the
>>meta-packages being versioned based on the kde release number?
>>IMO this would make more sense, especially when reading the kopete website,
>>finding the latest version is 0.9.2 and then noticing that portage only
>>has 3.4.
>
> In my experience most KDE users have no idea offhand what the individual app
> versions are and which versions belong to which kde.org release. They'd be
> confused.
>
> If a lot of users told me I'm wrong, I guess I'd be willing to concede this
> point...
>
> BTW, what do other distros use?
The only other distro I have recollection of is Debian and they have the
packages at the version number of the software. That is, they have a
kmail-1.5 being part of kde-3.3.x [1]
>
> Another problem is that there are a few KDE devs who are the same: they don't
> bother to put real version numbers on their apps (and especially libs), and
> they stay stuck at 0.0.1, or don't always receive a version number upgrade
> when they change. I can't find an example offhand now, but I remember seeing
> such before...
Probably. Dated version numbers could perhaps help? Stuff in
kdenonbeta probably suffers from never being released or versioned.
>
> And a third problem: it'd make it much easier for us to make a versioning/dep
> mistake (think about updating 300 differently-schemed version numbers)
> without noticing.
>
I can't disagree that p'masking a bucket-load of packages, all at
different versions will be a pain. Also, upgrading etc may require a
small army of gnome's (pun intended) to complete the task in a timely
manner.
Do any kde applications release outside of kde's main releases? (I have
a vague recollection of kopete doing this, but no others)
1: http://packages.debian.org/unstable/mail/kmail
--
Tom Wesley <tom@tomaw.org>
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE split ebuilds
2005-03-16 22:07 ` Tom Wesley
@ 2005-03-16 22:17 ` Graham Murray
2005-03-17 19:11 ` Dan Armak
1 sibling, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Graham Murray @ 2005-03-16 22:17 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
Tom Wesley <tom@tomaw.org> writes:
> Do any kde applications release outside of kde's main releases? (I have
> a vague recollection of kopete doing this, but no others)
Some KDE applications, such as AmaroK, deliberately did not include
themselves in the KDE releases purely so that they could release more
often than KDE updates are released.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE split ebuilds
2005-03-16 22:07 ` Tom Wesley
2005-03-16 22:17 ` Graham Murray
@ 2005-03-17 19:11 ` Dan Armak
2005-03-17 19:13 ` Tom Wesley
1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Dan Armak @ 2005-03-17 19:11 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1019 bytes --]
On Thursday 17 March 2005 00:07, Tom Wesley wrote:
> I can't disagree that p'masking a bucket-load of packages, all at
> different versions will be a pain. Also, upgrading etc may require a
> small army of gnome's (pun intended) to complete the task in a timely
> manner.
Indeed. Which is why I don't want to do this.
>
> Do any kde applications release outside of kde's main releases? (I have
> a vague recollection of kopete doing this, but no others)
Usually they stop when, or soon after, they are made part of an official
kde.org package. I can't recall any app that does this right now. Anyway, for
the very few that do, we can include extra releases with made-up version
numbers (or dates) that sort of make sense. These cases are so rare that this
doesn't fall into the 'confusing users' category IMHO.
--
Dan Armak
Gentoo Linux developer (KDE)
Public GPG key: http://dev.gentoo.org/~danarmak/danarmak-gpg-public.key
Fingerprint: DD70 DBF9 E3D4 6CB9 2FDD 0069 508D 9143 8D5F 8951
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE split ebuilds
2005-03-17 19:11 ` Dan Armak
@ 2005-03-17 19:13 ` Tom Wesley
0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Tom Wesley @ 2005-03-17 19:13 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1089 bytes --]
Dan Armak wrote:
> On Thursday 17 March 2005 00:07, Tom Wesley wrote:
>
>>I can't disagree that p'masking a bucket-load of packages, all at
>>different versions will be a pain. Also, upgrading etc may require a
>>small army of gnome's (pun intended) to complete the task in a timely
>>manner.
>
> Indeed. Which is why I don't want to do this.
>
>
>>Do any kde applications release outside of kde's main releases? (I have
>>a vague recollection of kopete doing this, but no others)
>
> Usually they stop when, or soon after, they are made part of an official
> kde.org package. I can't recall any app that does this right now. Anyway, for
> the very few that do, we can include extra releases with made-up version
> numbers (or dates) that sort of make sense. These cases are so rare that this
> doesn't fall into the 'confusing users' category IMHO.
Given those facts you've probably decided upon the best numbering
scheme... Confused users can easily be directed to use the KDE version
numbers I guess...
Thanks for entertaining the idea ;)
--
Tom Wesley <tom@tomaw.org>
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [gentoo-dev] Re: KDE split ebuilds
2005-03-16 20:29 ` Dan Armak
2005-03-16 21:48 ` Francesco Riosa
2005-03-16 22:07 ` Tom Wesley
@ 2005-03-18 16:21 ` Duncan
2005-03-19 16:26 ` Dan Armak
2 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Duncan @ 2005-03-18 16:21 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
Dan Armak posted <200503162229.21736.danarmak@gentoo.org>, excerpted
below, on Wed, 16 Mar 2005 22:29:21 +0200:
> On Tuesday 15 March 2005 21:25, Tom Wesley wrote:
>> Hey
>>
>> I've seen several queries regarding KDE's new split ebuilds and the
>> version numbers used for specific packages. It seems that all of the
>> KDE 3.4 packages have been versioned as 3.4.
>>
>> Should kmail, kopete etc not be using their own version numbers with the
>> meta-packages being versioned based on the kde release number?
>> IMO this would make more sense, especially when reading the kopete website,
>> finding the latest version is 0.9.2 and then noticing that portage only
>> has 3.4.
> In my experience most KDE users have no idea offhand what the individual app
> versions are and which versions belong to which kde.org release. They'd be
> confused.
>
> If a lot of users told me I'm wrong, I guess I'd be willing to concede this
> point...
This seems an appropriate place to mention that I was pleasantly surprised
to see an ARTS version that actually matched the KDE version, this time
around. =8^) I always wondered why they hadn't jumped the version to
match, and am glad it happened now, regardless of whether it was Gentoo or
KDE that made the decision.
--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman in
http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread