From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1FQitb-0007Mw-7B for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 04 Apr 2006 10:36:23 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.5) with SMTP id k34Aa9ml013438; Tue, 4 Apr 2006 10:36:09 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k34AXkrY010498 for ; Tue, 4 Apr 2006 10:33:46 GMT Received: from [151.56.15.244] (helo=enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.54) id 1FQir2-0000dd-MV for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 04 Apr 2006 10:33:45 +0000 From: "Diego 'Flameeyes' =?iso-8859-1?q?Petten=F2?=" To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] When will KDE 3.5 be marked as stable? Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 11:51:06 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 References: <200604040114.01418@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> <623652d50604040212r6f543d37pedb645e979456755@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <623652d50604040212r6f543d37pedb645e979456755@mail.gmail.com> X-Face: +=-v@W}H`=.Bn2t&97Un7{[.c0aP0"8)JI?7Z?E>l>ZNY|,=?utf-8?q?mL=5C3bs=0A=09xW=23jRz=7CVa=5C?=@NIS3-'W[F.^YLqK=rS:D*Ke`Y5giI@$(xIBQ<0i740;wuI{lYd>>=?utf-8?q?eFVDuAr=0A=09=3Br=5B*=7E/zd=604dEI?= Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart60227545.0NgseyykXd"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200604041151.08917@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> X-Archives-Salt: 004edff0-5600-4284-9897-f0f055ef2210 X-Archives-Hash: 2508728ecdc3867e1562b34b37e95c02 --nextPart60227545.0NgseyykXd Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Tuesday 04 April 2006 11:12, Chris Bainbridge wrote: > Surely the question isn't whether the upgrade is perfect, but whether > it's better than the current stable release? It is not. > 'find /usr/portage/kde-base -name '*3.4.3*.patch' |wc -l' shows 15 > patches, 3.5.1 has 11 patches, and 3.5.2 has 6 patches. (I realise > that isn't a perfect patch count...) Some of the patches are not in files/ for 3.5.x series. Also, many of the=20 problems faced are more severe than 3.4.x series up to now. > As far as I can see the *ebuilds* for kde work fine. If the newer > versions of kde have the problems you describe, then they should be > package.masked. There's a big difference between theory and practice. We already get enough= =20 request to mark 3.5 stable (hell we had request to mark it stable when ther= e=20 were at least two systematical crashes for everyone), two weeks after 3.5.0= =20 release IIRC, if we were to put it under package.mask, we really would be=20 submerged by bug reports and mails about that. Anyway, ~arch is not technically broken as we patch that as soon as humanly= =20 possible, so it's not a p.mask kind of problem (a part from umbrello, but=20 that's no news at all). I can ensure you we'd like to mark 3.5 stable as much as you do, probably e= ven=20 more as there are fixed things, but it's not possible for now. =2D-=20 Diego "Flameeyes" Petten=F2 - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/ Gentoo/Alt lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE --nextPart60227545.0NgseyykXd Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBEMkGMe2h1+2mHVWMRAvJzAJ0UmEMdJn9cTGKIqT3OKcoHq9s9cwCguJrp OfZYz+pDYPj6tLhirZnq3PU= =Kwjk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart60227545.0NgseyykXd-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list