Op woensdag 14 december 2011 22:02:41 schreef Juan Luis Baptiste: > On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 3:54 PM, Jose Jorge <[email protected]> wrote: > > Le 14/12/2011 21:22, Juan Luis Baptiste a écrit : > >> Take into consideration that additional to the 157 bugs[1] fixed in > > > > Please, let's not talk again and again of what is an update and what is a > > backport... > > > > New features -> no update, that's our policy. > > I know the policy and it allows exceptions (no matter if this exact > case isn't listed there but it should IMO) but due to the HUGE amount > of bug fixes and the tiny amount of new features was that mikala > considered it was worth an update rather than a backport. If there > where few bug fixes then it could be possible to cherry pick them and > patch the package available on mga 1 but in this case it isn't. > > Also AFAIK, the policy is not something written in stone and up to > discussion if there's a case for it.
i agree with you here, but with kdenlive after the numerous crashes, corrupted project files, etc... there's just too much that can go wrong with even bugfixes imho, let alone new features. if my wife wasn't using kdenlive i would've said, that it was a maintainers nightmare to get all these separately fixed with bugfixes and testing, and to go ahead (and i believe i said so in the past), but now that the project is almost ready and we've had our share of bugs/issues, i'm sorry, i don't want to have ANY risk whatsoever to this project file and i don't think it'll load correctly, or even have the same rendered result... so, no, sorry, i know it's buggy and crashy and stuff, but if you do update to this, i'll not update this. it's just too risky.
