Am Mittwoch, 28. November 2012 schrieb Kevin Krammer: > On Wednesday, 2012-11-28, Julian wrote: > > On 28/11/12 03:21, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > > While I´d really appreciate testing packages for KDEPIM 2 I > > > understand that they add additionally work for maintaining them in > > > parallel. I remember some mentioning of new packages with KDE SC > > > 4.10 and intent to skip 4.9 due to man power reasons here on this > > > list. > > > > > > So please consult archives. AFAIR its all there. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > I'm sure there is some reasoning from way back, but its pretty > > obvious to me that kdepim/kmail/akonadi was a fail for squeeze and > > other distros. > > However upstream kdepim and kde in general is moving ahead and you > > mention that they are skipping 4.9 altogether. > > I think what Martin is referring to is that Debian packagers are going > to skip packaging 4.9 > I am not aware of KDEPIM not having been part of 4.9 upstream.
Yeah. I refered to debian packager plans. > > I'm quite aware of the bugs with this package so I wonder if keeping > > kdepim down @ 4.4.x everywhere is the best plan, particularly if > > the problem is that there isn't much to test. > > That version is working very well, so staying at that for the new > stable was likely a very good idea. I don´t know KDEPIM 2 from own experience so far, but from what I read on kdepim and kdepim-users I tend to agree. And yes, 4.4.11 works really fine here. Still I hope that the Debian Qt/KDE packaging manages to provide KDEPIM 2 packages for testing, but I fully understand that this will take its time. -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201211291234.03813.mar...@lichtvoll.de
