[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       suse-kde
Subject:    Re: [opensuse-kde] KDE repo structure proposal
From:       Raymond Wooninck <tittiatcoke () gmail ! com>
Date:       2010-04-30 20:38:06
Message-ID: 201004302238.06743.tittiatcoke () gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Friday 30 April 2010 17:11:07 Lubos Lunak wrote:

>  That is the question. Unstable can be seen as Factory with the latest
> upstream snapshot, but it can be also seen as the latest upstream snapshot
> with some more packages added. If it's the sooner, Unstable should be kept
> with Stable and Factory, if it's the latter and it won't follow Factory
> closely, then IMO it should be kept separately.
> 
>  Dirk, Raymond: Which of those two should it be?

In my opinion I think it would be the latter. Unstable is constantly based on 
the KDE trunk with weekly snapshots. Also support packages (e.g. akonadi, 
soprano, etc) are updated with later snapshots as required.  I am trying to 
keep as much as possible the openSUSE specific patches, but the main target is 
to get the package build. So in the process one or more patches might get 
lost. 

I wanted already to discuss this topic with Dirk to see if we can really 
disconnect Factory and Unstable with regards to the support packages. It is 
quite often that we have broken packages in Unstable, just because of a small 
change. This despite that we already have a higher version in Unstable. 

As you also mentioned further, Factory is taking some changes from Unstable, 
but Unstable is not a development repository where we are preparing the next 
KDE version for a new openSUSE version. 

So personally I would welcome a clear split.

Dirk, any opinion from your side ?

Raymond
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kde+unsubscribe@opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-kde+help@opensuse.org

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]