On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 6:16 AM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler at chello.at> wrote: > Thomas Janssen wrote: >> Since i was the one who suggested it.. :) I do understand you but, if >> the KDE alternative is just giving a very basic functionality and is >> having problems (VPN IIRC) then we should consider using what works >> well, gives more output, does not suggest (again at the beginning of >> an update to reboot) stupid things. > > Uh, VPN problems are a NM/KNM issue, not a KPK one. Whoops, i mixed a NetworkManager issue in here, sorry :) > The "suggests a reboot too early" bug is bizarre indeed, I should look if I > can silence those reboot prompts. (I'm for silencing them entirely, KDE > users are smart enough to know when they need to restart their computer. ;-) > It'd also probably be the fastest way to zap that bug once and for all.) > > Another thing I noticed is that KPK doesn't recognize different update types > anymore after the latest PK update. :-( > > I think what needs to happen here is that more people need to test PK > updates in testing and that those updates need to be BLOCKED from getting > pushed to stable if they break KPK. Throwing out KPK is entirely the wrong > solution for such regressions introduced by PK updates. (Neither of the > above bugs happened before the latest PK update. It's not KPK's fault that > PK breaks backwards compatibility under it.) > > One problem is that PK/KPK (and GPK, too) moves so fast that, even when I'm > running the latest Fedora release, I'm still always running an already > deprecated branch, so spending time fixing things might not pay off. (But on > the other hand, F12 still has 9 months or so to live, so I guess fixing F12 > issues is beneficial in any case.) I feel sorry there. I know you have already a lot of work and you do a great job. I badly need to learn to code to be able to help out a bit more. >> KPK is in my eyes, ugly, unreliable and too basic. I suggested to you >> as well to try the latest GNOME-packagekit to see what i mean. >> I think KPK is on it's way, but not yet ready. > > Yet KPK just works. (Neither of the above 2 bugs is a showstopper, they're > just minor annoyances that can be easily worked around.) Well, yeah, it "just" works. It would be good if that two annoyances are fixed. I know how hard it is sometimes, for various reasons. And yes, it needs moar testing. I will help out more with testing it, even i'm a yum updater ;) >> If we dont want to lose users to GNOME because of not fully working, >> suggesting stupid things KDE apps, we might better use the >> alternative, even if it's written GTK/GTK+. >> By the way, should everybody use the GNOME SPIN as well because there >> are no QT alternatives for the installed system-config-* utility's in >> the KDE SPIN? ;) > > We actually do have alternatives for some of them, but the GTK+ app gets > dragged in by Anaconda's dependencies. :-( For example, there is KUser in > kdeadmin which can be used instead of system-config-users. This Anaconda > dependency bloat is one of the unsolved problems. Others are stuff I use > once and never again (e.g. system-config-selinux, to turn the crap off and > never look at it again). It's not the same as a package updater which users > will be running daily. Indeed, that makes it hard to have alternatives installed with the livecd as we have still the good-old-700MB ones. But to be honest, i don`t care that much what is used for that system-config-* stuff. Same here, i use them once in a while. Most times if i use one of them, just because i'm curious about changes or if a user reports a problem with it ;) -- LG Thomas Dubium sapientiae initium
