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
