On 16/06/12 08:01 PM, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> When I stepped in to maintain 'abiword' its development release 2.9.1
> was already packaged and I fully support this decision.
> 'Stable' 2.8.6 had great many bugs with very little hope for fix
> because stable releases of abiword are very rarely updated, if ever.
The lack of resource is probably the main reason of you thinking it
lacks updates. The problem is that if we spend our time updating 2.8,
we'll never work on the next release.
If you have concern about several 2.8.x bug that have been fixed, please
list them, post it to the mailing list. I'm willing to consider
releasing 2.8.7. No promises, but we can possibly do something about it.
As for 2.9.1 having been already packaged, well, shit happen, and it can
be fixed. That's why I filed the bug.
Ubuntu ship it, and all the Ubuntu users come back to us saying things
are broken, and they are. Some have been addressed already in the
release that didn't get updated by the distribution. FYI, Ubuntu folks
point back at you.
> If we were still shipping abiword v2.8.6 there little we could do
> about existing bugs and perhaps if would be easier to leave the
> package poorly maintained.
If you were still shipping 2.8.6, the question wouldn't be. 2.9.x is
VERY UNSTABLE. It even contain some MAJOR regression in light of the
file format and data, something you don't want to be responsible for. Do
you?
>
> You know, few users can be happy if fix follows bug report 3...5 years
> later...
You know, we all do that on a voluntary basis. UNPAID. On our spare
time. I would expect somebody familiar with how things work to
understand that part.
>
> Neither stability not quality of 2.8.6 was better than 2.9.2
Says who?
> and
> packaging of 2.9.2 helped to close over 40 bugs and enable unique
> collaborative editing features. Feedback was very positive.
>
> Personally I probably wouldn't use 2.8.6 at all because most appealing
> collaborative features become available in 2.9.2.
>
> Another important reason for packaging 2.9.2 is transition to GTK-3.
> Due to amount of GTK-related changes I found it particularly difficult
> to backport fixes.
Welcome to our world.
> Also because of transition to GTK-3 I doubt if it would be possible to
> continue shipping 2.8.6.
Firefox (or whatever you decided to call it in Debian) and Thunderbird
still are stuck to Gtk 2. So do a lot of other major software. I guess
this argument just fell short.
Also the Gtk3 port of AbiWord still needs a lot of work. You are doing a
disfavor to you users, as well as ours.
> To summarise, our decisions to package development version was
> influenced by the following facts:
>
> * stable version is too old.
> * stable version is never (or extremely rarely) updated.
> * little difference in quality between stable and development but
> dev. version is easier to follow.
>
> In regards to updates 2.9.2 were not better than stable 2.8.6 - for
> example archive of 2.9.2 have missing file and 2.9.2.1 was never
> published.
Did you file a bug?
[...]
Bottom line, next time an Ubuntu or Debian user come to complain, I'll
send them to that bug report. So that we can actually spend time fixing
stuff instead of explaining why Debian and Ubuntu screwed it.
Hub
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
