Stability of Devel repos

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

On Saturday 24 November 2012 16:21:54 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> On Friday, November 23, 2012 14:06:24 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> > That's why I'm thinking if maybe it makes more sense to not build our
> > Devel
> > packages from Git every day, but keep the latest stable versions and only
> > build from Git if we actually depend on newer code. I don't know if that's
> > technically feasible, but it would make it easier to see whether bugs were
> > caused by us or not.
> 
> It might not be what we want: If something in devel breaks, and we don't do
> regular updates from that, we'll just see the breakager later. The point of
> the devel repo is not that it's usable, but to reveal problems.

Okay, I understand that.
And as Marco said, we'll switch to the 4.10 branch of KDE SC as soon as it 
exists, because that's the one PA4 will depend on. Makes sense.

So that means that we should report bugs caused by other components of KDE SC 
upstream as soon as possible and hope they'll be fixed before the 4.10 release?
Is it okay if I still report bugs in Active unless I know which 
component/project/product they're caused by, and then you'll report them to 
the appropriate project? Most of the time I'd probably not know where to 
report them anyway.

> We used the testing repo for the "sync once in a while but only when things
> mostly work" case.

Sure. I thought that with our "always stable master", Master would yield a 
stable image, but of course that only means that our own repos are stable and 
bugs in kde* affect us even with our stable Master. 
As you can see, I'm still learning all that stuff ;)