Riku Voipio wrote:
In theory, kde x.y.* should be api/abi compatible. In practice, upstream
may change method in kdelibs between 3.3.2 and 3.3.3 after noticing
that the only user of that method is a plugin in kmail, change the
few place the method is used, and and assume that nobody is going to
Adeodato Simó wrote:
* Riku Voipio [Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:05:00 +0200]:
On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 03:30:03PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
Yay, confusing quote styles.
I agree. In this way, the kde packages have allways been broken. We
have been so far reluctant to enforce all of kde being the sam
Adeodato Simó wrote:
* Steve Langasek [Sun, 21 Nov 2004 02:47:35 -0800]:
KDE 3.3 in sarge is contingent on the KDE maintainers being able to provide
the same sort of assurances that were asked of the GNOME maintainers
regarding the safety of allowing these packages to trickle in (i.e., the
corre
On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 03:30:03PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Adeodato Simó wrote:
> > We know from experience that KDE upstream really ensures that their
> > monolithic x.y.z works together nicely, but that mixing even minor
> > point releases can break things very badly.
> In that case, y
* Riku Voipio [Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:05:00 +0200]:
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 03:30:03PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> I agree. In this way, the kde packages have allways been broken. We
> have been so far reluctant to enforce all of kde being the same version,
> since it would seem make testing maig
On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 01:05:00PM +0200, Riku Voipio wrote:
> > In that case, you should be using the control files to prevent mixed
> > installs. If users can install packages in some combination that won't
> > work; the Depends/Recommends/Provides/Conflicts fields should be used to
> > tell
On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 01:05:00PM +0200, Riku Voipio wrote:
> In theory, kde x.y.* should be api/abi compatible. In practice, upstream
> may change method in kdelibs between 3.3.2 and 3.3.3 after noticing
> that the only user of that method is a plugin in kmail, change the
> few place the method i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
(Sorry for breaking the threads, but I'm not subscribed to d-release.)
I'd be willing to help in testing apps for Sarge, provided that there is
some clear coordination and the intention is "let's go for KDE 3.3.1
unless ..." and not "maybe we'll all
* Steve Langasek [Sun, 21 Nov 2004 02:47:35 -0800]:
> KDE 3.3 in sarge is contingent on the KDE maintainers being able to provide
> the same sort of assurances that were asked of the GNOME maintainers
> regarding the safety of allowing these packages to trickle in (i.e., the
> correctness of the p
On Sun, Nov 21, 2004 at 02:44:08AM +0100, Frederik Dannemare wrote:
> On Friday 19 November 2004 01:42, Colin Watson wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 06:26:20PM -0600, Chris Cheney wrote:
> > > kdepim will probably need to stop following policy wrt building
> > > static libs to be able to build a
On Friday 19 November 2004 01:42, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 06:26:20PM -0600, Chris Cheney wrote:
> > kdepim will probably need to stop following policy wrt building
> > static libs to be able to build at all on s390. It seems fairly
> > pathetic that the s390 has the smallest d
On Fri, Nov 19, 2004 at 12:42:58AM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 06:26:20PM -0600, Chris Cheney wrote:
> > kdepim will probably need to stop following policy wrt building static
> > libs to be able to build at all on s390. It seems fairly pathetic that
> > the s390 has the sm
On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 06:26:20PM -0600, Chris Cheney wrote:
> kdepim will probably need to stop following policy wrt building static
> libs to be able to build at all on s390. It seems fairly pathetic that
> the s390 has the smallest diskspace of all the buildds including
> m68k's. Is it ok that
13 matches
Mail list logo
