[kde-linux] Another KDE 4.x print problem?

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

In <4AEFE58C.6000906 at hawaii.rr.com>, david wrote:
>Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>> Squeeze is testing now.  It contains KDE 4.x packages and is fairly
>> regularly updated with 4.x.1 and 4.x.3 releases coming from uploads to
>> unstable.  These packages are no support for being installed
>> simultaneously with non-library KDE 3.x packages, so it is not possible to
>> have both KDE 3 and KDE 4 installed on a Debian system using the KDE
>> packages created by the Debian maintainers. When Squeeze is released, it
>> will not contain any non-library KDE 3 packages.
>
>Another good reason to avoid KDE4, in my opinion. There's no reason to
>drop KDE3 packages, particularly of apps that haven't been ported to
>KDE4 and might not ever be.

Let me clarify.  There will be no binaries in Squeeze that are generated from 
the KDE 3 source provided by the KDE project.  Things like kdiff3, k3b, etc. 
that just need the KDE 3 libraries will continue to be in Debian, as will the 
KDE 3 libraries.  This is the difference between "KDE 3 Application" and 
"Application using KDE 3"; the former goes away, the latter may not.

The KDE 3 source provided by the KDE project is largely abandoned, and 
unmaintained software does not belong in Debian.  In addition, the Debian team 
that maintains KDE (among other packages), simply does not have the time to 
maintain both KDE 3 and KDE 4 simultaneously.

Plus, I don't see how your avoidance of KDE 4 would prevent any distribution 
from dropping KDE 3 packages.  Some distributions, openSUSE in particular, 
have supported side-by-side installation.  Even in the upcoming oS 11.2, where 
there are no official KDE 3 packages, will be maintaining the ability to 
install KDE 3 packages from the OBS side-by-side.

>> Upload to unstable are virtually unrestricted and the automated migration
>> will pull them into testing once their dependencies can be satisfied if
>> they do not introduce bugs after some period of time.
>
>I used to run the laptop on Unstable. It was entertaining. Quite often,
>updating lead to a non-working system. ;-)

It's off-topic for this list, but I prefer a mixed setup 
<http://iguanasuicide.net/node/4>.

>> As with all Debian packages, the maintainers are largely dependent on
>> upstream to provide bug fixes for non-packaging-related bugs.  If there's
>> no upstream bug-fixers, the Debian bugs will likely remain unfixed.
>
>Unless it's something where Debian decided to do its own "non-branded"
>version. The only people who can use a "brand" in Debian is Debian. ;-)

As a maintainer, your packages are your domain.  If you have the ability and 
will to produce patches yourself, whether they be for bugs fixes or new 
features, you can include them.  It is good to communicate with upstream about 
issues, since a small divergence from upstream makes future maintenance 
easier.

Debian removes branding that legally or morally prevents them from applying 
patches as needed.  In particular, they want to be able to provide security 
patches that are small as possible rather than moving to a new upstream 
version, to minimize the amount of issues caused by a security update.  
Mozilla has issues with the use of the brand names "FireFox", "ThunderBird", 
etc. when the software includes patches not previously approved by Mozilla.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.                   ,= ,-_-. =.
bss at iguanasuicide.net                   ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy         `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/                    \_/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-linux/attachments/20091103/cff34538/attachment.sig>