Kevin Kofler wrote: > If they want me to debug their issues, sure. Selective updates are not > supportable. They shouldn't be necessary anyway, as our updates, even > version upgrades, are supposed to Just Work. Excluding something is just a > workaround for some bug, and not upgrading most stuff is just bad > altogether. And if I work hard on pushing bugfix updates, that's not so > people run the unfixed stuff and so I can spend my time trying to debug an > issue that's already fixed! Sorry. KDE/Qt 4.4/4.6 should have been a Fedora 13 feature. Instead you shoved it out, which is unlike any other package to date. Ex: We still have Firefox 3.5 in F12. OpenOffice.org will still be 3.1 while 3.2 is out. Just because KDE 4.2 and Qt 4.5 are "buggy" shouldn't have given 4.4/4.6 a free ride into stable. Backporting bugs is part of any Fedora package. Now that you got your way, this is deteriorating into a shift by you to move Fedora to rolling releases so that your personal update model works instead of complying to Fedora tradition. At over 500 emails so far, I think it's proof enough for a need of a FESco review of the KDE 4.4/Qt 4.6 update to make sure this crap doesn't happen again. Sorry Kevin, but trying to fix Fedora policies so that *your* upgrade paths will look correct isn't the right way to go about things. This is for another topic, but if Qt is supposed to be the "neat" thing in the world like Nokia is trying to market, I would expect it to be a little more stable than what it is now. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
