[DRAFT for discussion] KDE 4.2 upload to unstable

[Sune Vuorela]

On Wednesday 04 February 2009 10:11:49 Ana Guerrero wrote:

[snip kdebase legacy]

> It is not a blocker, but I do not see why it needs to wait? Actually it
> could be uploaded in any time if the source package name is different (will
> need conflcits with current stuff) and people will be able to check their
> kde3 stuff/packages work with the legacy packages.
> For sure, this will depend heavily on when people working on it considers
> it is ready.

I just wanted to make sure that we wasn't planinng on waiting on this step 
before proceeding with the next step. 
And I agree it depend on the people working on it, but it can come "at any 
time", before or after going kde desktop.



> > Fix the issues that shows and do aggressive package removal from testing
> > to get kde4.2 into testing.
>
> I think here is mostly where we differ, i see you approach is more
> agressive than mine and getting it just done in the less time possible. I

I'm expecting that we will be blocking quite some testing migration - and the 
set of packages that needs changes do not differ.

Maybe release team (hi marc ;)  could tell if they want it fast and more messy 
or slowly and more quiet.

A big chunk of the problematic packages are the ones that uses more of kde 
than kdelibs (everything that just uses kdelibs kde3 can stay untouched as 
before)

It is a total of around ~50 packages, of these 15 is window decorations and 
stuff, some have unneded build dependencies on kdebase-dev when they only use 
kdelibs, some are plugins for kde3 apps and left is only a few apps with their 
versions in experimental and final, the problematic list:

boson
tellico
taskjuggler (fathi promised to take action, so not that problematic)
lurker (wtf?)

and a few bugs have been filed already for some other issues.

I will send out the full list after a bit of modifications and a bit more 
research. Or maybe try *urgh* to use a wiki page.


> > We will break some packages no matter what way we do it, and I really
> > don't think.
>
> you do not think... what?

heh. funny ;)
My kmail was doing tricks on me.

> I agree we'll break stuff, but it can be minimized.
>
> > If we could get some dates on when we could do it, I expect both to take
> > around a week, I at least would try to clear up big parts of my calendar
> > for that week.
>
> What do you mean here with "both" ?

"both" as in the way you describe and in the way I describe, at least where it 
conflicts.

> I do not think it will just take a week, but again I am suggesting a much
> more "quiet" strategy here.

I just see the quiet, slow strategy as the long and painful approach and thus 
prefer to get it done with immediately.

/Sune
-- 
Man, do you know how may I remove a login?

You can never send to the e-mail address for overclocking the LCD operating 
system on the USB BIOS port of a periferic of the shell.