Issues with: kf6-prison_6.23.0~rc1-1_source.changes ACCEPTED into experimental

[Boyuan Yang]

Hi,

在 2026-02-07六的 22:26 +0100，Aurélien COUDERC写道：
> Dear Boyuan,
> 
> first let me thank you for your multiple contributions to the packaging of KDE software, we have a huge number of packages to maintain in the team and your help is really
> appreciated !
> 
> Regarding your KF 6.23 uploads there are multiple issues that I want to raise :
> - We never mix framework (or plasma) x.y packages versions. That's entirely not tested and to the best of my knowledge not supported by upstream. If your going to upgrade
> KF6 you have to upload the whole package set and ensure each package builds with its build dependencies of the same version, from extra-cmake-modules up to the leaves of the
> KF6 package set. There are several helper tools in the pkg-kde-dev-scripts repo to help with this.
> - The tars made available in advance of official release are for packagers to prepare the packages but (again to the best of my knowledge) are considered not released
> yet/private at this stage, and we are given access only under the condition that we don't make them publicly available to our users. There may be blockers and respins if the
> packages before the official release (and that does happen regularly). So don't upload these before their official releases.
> 
> If you want to work on the KF6 or Plasma package set your welcome to do so but don't do it without review from Patrick or myself for now. (I'm guessing you needed a newer
> version of prison for one of the KDE apps, right ? 🙂)
> 
> It's true that our rules of how things should be done are not clearly written somewhere so please coordinate with us on this list or on the #debian-qt-kde IRC channel before
> working on either KF or Plasma.

Thanks for the heads up. I was aware of the issue that KF6 packages shall be upgraded
all together using stable channel (or otherwise it's not tested/supported), and that's
why I was uploading rc version prison to Experimental now. Although not every developer
makes use of Debian Experimental, I consider packages in Experimental to be like a sandbox
so that we can test wild things out before targeting actual coordinated uploads.
On the other hand, I do my homework to review upstream source code
diffs before uploading, thanks to the source code availability on invent.kde.org.

I was indeed not aware of pkg-kde-dev-scripts beforehand. Will look into it.

Do you consider carrying backported patches on top of official releases to be a
good option? Essentially the final outcome would be the same
(e.g., v6.20/v6.22 + patches_we_need_in_upstream_git_trunk ~= v6.23), but we would
be still using official tarballs.

In the near future I am looking into the possibility for a bump in kf6-* packages from
6.20 to 6.22. I will see how that can be done in a proper way.

Many thanks,
Boyuan Yang
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 858 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-kde-talk/attachments/20260207/898b0dd2/attachment.sig>