Am Freitag, 30. Oktober 2015, 10:20:58 CET schrieb Gary Dale: > On 30/10/15 04:49 AM, Tim Ruehsen wrote: > > On Friday 30 October 2015 00:09:31 Gary Dale wrote: > >> On 29/10/15 04:54 PM, Brad Rogers wrote: > >>> On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 09:54:22 -0400 > >>> Gary Dale <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hello Gary, > >>> > >>>> And not wanting to rehash that old argument, the current system is > >>>> clearly not working. Surely all the bright people maintaining Debian > >>> > >>> Debian is run by humans. Humans, being humans, make mistakes. It's > >>> been admitted that libqt5x11extras5 v5.5.1 getting into testing was not > >>> ideal. Also, reference to this being a corner case. IOW, a situation > >>> that was difficult, if not impossible, to foresee. > >>> > >>>> can come up with something better? > >>> > >>> It works the way *they* want it, mistakes notwithstanding. If you don't > >>> like that method of migration, then maybe Debian testing isn't for you. > >>> Breakage happens in testing. By and large, not frequently, but it does > >>> happen. Also, it's not usually such a major issue. To paraphrase a > >>> well known English saying; "Stuff happens". > >> > >> Yes, but it's been happening a LOT this time around. I've been running > >> Debian Testing for over a decade and don't recall seeing this many major > >> fails ever. > >> > >> If my memory serves me, KDE4 didn't make it into Testing until it was > >> reasonably complete and stable - somewhere after 4.2 wasn't it? Until > >> then Testing still had KDE3. Why the push to get KDE5 out when it is > >> still having massive teething problems? > > > > Because we (unstable and/or testing users) want it ASAP :-) > > > > Breakages happen all the way, but you should be able to apply workarounds > > to recover - in this case downgrading libqt5x11extras5. > > If you don't want (or can't) do that, unstable (and maybe testing) is not > > a good choice for you. > > > > The 'brute force' method would be to use btrfs + snapshots before each > > upgrade (e.g. done by a little script that automatically removes old > > shapshots). > > > > That is the burden to unstable users - but it also is kind of fun. > > > > Regards, > > > > Tim > > I can understand why "unstable" users may want it, but that doesn't > those of us using testing are a different breed. We want to help get > things ready for the next stable release. That means helping to identify > bugs that could cause problems for people wanting stable software.
Which you can´t do unless you actually receive the new stuff for installing. Any testing on KDE SC 4.14 does not serve much of a purpose anymore, as upstream switched over already. Debian as usual has been later than other distributions, waiting for things to settle a bit, but at some time there is the time to switch over. And yes, I do think upstream Plasma 5 and KDE Frameworks, especially KDEPIM needs further stabilizition work. And that slowing development speed a bit in favor for more bug fixing could be beneficial. > We're not in this for the excitement/fun. We're the people who use our > computers a lot and need stuff that is basically working. That's why we > make good bug reporters. However we can't report bugs on software that > doesn't work at all. I am running Plasma 5 on Unstable for months now and it basically worked *most* of the time *just* fine. And if it didn´t work it often didn´t take more than a day or two to work again. From what I read here I get the impression that testing users tend to have much more issues due to package migration issues. Maybe how testing is created needs adjustments, I don´t know. I just notice that it seems that testing users seem to have more issues than unstable users when looking at this list. *Or* unstable users don´t write to the list about issues, but instead just fix / work-around on their own. That said: No amount of "this should be different" talk on this list will make any changes happen. Actual work on the change will do. Thanks, -- Martin
