>>>>> "cobaco" == cobaco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
cobaco> <quote>Basically, it's the difference between having a sysadmin cobaco> spending fifteen minutes every day or week tweaking your server cobaco> to keep it running, or having a sysadmin come in for a week once cobaco> a year to do a major upgrade.</quote> cobaco> Note that the RM was talking about servers there, while kde is cobaco> end-user software, big difference IMHO. Taking into account that cobaco> kde isn't server-software and that kde won't do release if there cobaco> are major bugs left I don't think stability should be a problem cobaco> in this case. Why KDE cannot be used on servers (how about a X terminal server? You don't have to set it up?), and why on stable you do not expect a stable KDE? What I perceived: if you want an updated KDE, go run testing or unstable. If many people like a really updated KDE, one of them should act up and package a CVS version in experimental. I really don't see the point to let in really new packages that we don't know whether other packages are broken by it. And I don't mind Debian stable being marked as "always having an outdated KDE". It is supposed to work that way. Regards, Isaac.