Re: vote
"Ivan E. Moore II" wrote: > > ok... Potato users be heard (woody users are stuck with what I give you) :) > >option 1: upgrade potato .deb's to 2.1-beta1+ (ie..move from stable to > cvs snapshots as I am doing with woody) > >option 2: create a seperate repository on kde.tdyc.com for kde 2.1 potato > .deb's. > >option 3: wait for 2.1's release to do potato debs > > (note...when I start making 2.1 debs for potato I will no longer be able > to make 2.0.1 debs) > >Due to my network snafu I ended up being a day behind in uploads for > woody.. > which actually ends up being a good thing. :) (at least IMO)...in the 24hrs > to follow beta1 a bunch of bug fixes have been made including one very > annoying > one with email configuration. (plus 24hrs more of me cleaning things up) > > so..your choice. > > Ivan > > -- I vote for option 2 but 3 will do. -- The best way to escape from a problem is to solve it. Alan Saporta
Re: vote
option 3: wait for 2.1's release to do potato debs __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. http://shopping.yahoo.com/
Re: vote
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 11:03:11PM -0700, Ivan E. Moore II wrote: >option 3: wait for 2.1's release to do potato debs this option! :-) best regards -- ~~~ /* | QLIVER / | / | ~ ~~/| / | ~Marcin Landowski _| /_| ~ *_|o|___|___|__@ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~~~ \___/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~~
Re: vote
In case the polls are still open I vote for 2. KDE is the best work environment I can have. I feel that option 2 will leave me with a working system more likely than 3. -- Did you know that if you play a Windows 2000 cd backwards, you will hear the voice of Satan? That's nothing! If you play it forward, it'll install Windows 2000.
Re: vote
option 1: upgrade potato .deb's to 2.1-beta1+ (ie..move from stable to cvs snapshots as I am doing with woody)
Re: vote
Ivan, I agree that Option 3 seems most fitting (in accord with the stable status of potato). Option 2 would certainly be acceptable though it would be more demanding of your time -- a quantity with which you are already all too generous. By the way -- add my name to the list of folks who greatly appreciate all of the time and effort you expend on bringing KDE to debian. You rock! Cheers ~ pat
Re: vote
Ivan, I think we have been test dummies for kde as it is now - so I guess I would vote for option 1 as long as it doesn't complete wipe out kmail - :) Thank you On Thursday 14 December 2000 22:03, Ivan E. Moore II wrote: > ok... Potato users be heard (woody users are stuck with what I give you) :) > >option 1: upgrade potato .deb's to 2.1-beta1+ (ie..move from stable to > cvs snapshots as I am doing with woody) > >option 2: create a seperate repository on kde.tdyc.com for kde 2.1 > potato .deb's. > >option 3: wait for 2.1's release to do potato debs > > (note...when I start making 2.1 debs for potato I will no longer be able > to make 2.0.1 debs) > >Due to my network snafu I ended up being a day behind in uploads for > woody.. which actually ends up being a good thing. :) (at least IMO)...in > the 24hrs to follow beta1 a bunch of bug fixes have been made including one > very annoying one with email configuration. (plus 24hrs more of me cleaning > things up) > > so..your choice. > > Ivan -- Jaye Inabnit, ARS ke6sls e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 707-442-6579 h/m 707-441-7096 p http://www.qsl.net/ke6slsICQ# 12741145 This mail composed with kmail on kde on X on linux warped by debian If it's stupid, but works, it ain't stupid.
Fwd: Re: vote
-- Forwarded Message -- Subject: Re: vote Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 10:05:52 +0100 From: Pablo de Vicente <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Myles Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> El Vie 15 Dic 2000 07:39, Myles Green escribió: >On Thursday 14 December 2000 23:03, Ivan E. Moore II wrote: >> ok... Potato users be heard (woody users are stuck with what I give >> you) :) > > > >> so..your choice. > >I would prefer option 3: wait for 2.1's release to do potato debs, > but would settle for otion 2. I like this proposal. I vote for it. Pablo. _ Pablo de Vicente ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.oan.es (Spain ---
Re: vote
Oops! I sent this to Pablo, sorry! Pablo de Vicente wrote: > El Vie 15 Dic 2000 07:39, Myles Green escribi: > >> On Thursday 14 December 2000 23:03, Ivan E. Moore II wrote: >> >>> ok... Potato users be heard (woody users are stuck with what I give >>> you) :) >> >> >> >>> so..your choice. >> >> I would prefer option 3: wait for 2.1's release to do potato debs, but >> would settle for otion 2. > > > I like this proposal. I vote for it. > > Pablo Agree. Sönke -- Ping Netzwerksysteme GmbH - Sönke von Stamm Lavesstr. 80, 30159 Hannover, http://www.pingworld.net Fon: 0511-35 39 94-0 - Fax: 0511-35 39 94-30
Re: vote
I vote for option 3 because the other two would not be stable. Potato implies stable (I think *is* very stable). Would be have 2.0.1 maintainence? >Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 23:03:11 -0700 >Resent-from: debian-kde@lists.debian.org >From: "Ivan E. Moore II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Resent-sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >Content-disposition: inline >Precedence: list >X-Loop: debian-kde@lists.debian.org >User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i >X-Envelope-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/514 > >ok... Potato users be heard (woody users are stuck with what I give you) :) > > option 1: upgrade potato .deb's to 2.1-beta1+ (ie..move from stable to > cvs snapshots as I am doing with woody) > > option 2: create a seperate repository on kde.tdyc.com for kde 2.1 potato > .deb's. > > option 3: wait for 2.1's release to do potato debs > >(note...when I start making 2.1 debs for potato I will no longer be able >to make 2.0.1 debs) > > Due to my network snafu I ended up being a day behind in uploads for woody.. >which actually ends up being a good thing. :) (at least IMO)...in the 24hrs >to follow beta1 a bunch of bug fixes have been made including one very annoying >one with email configuration. (plus 24hrs more of me cleaning things up) > >so..your choice. > >Ivan > >-- > >Ivan E. Moore II >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://snowcrash.tdyc.com >GPG KeyID=90BCE0DD >GPG Fingerprint=F2FC 69FD 0DA0 4FB8 225E 27B6 7645 8141 90BC E0DD > > >-- >To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- /--\ |James D. Freels, P.E._i, Ph.D.|Phone: (865)576-8645 | | L | A | |Oak Ridge National Laboratory |FAX:(865)574-9172 | H | I | L | |Research Reactors Division|work e-m: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | F | N | P | |P. O. Box 2008|home [EMAIL PROTECTED]| I | U | H | |Oak Ridge, TN. 37831-6392 |world's best neutrons | R | X | A | \--/
Re: vote
My choice: > option 3: wait for 2.1's release to do potato debs Thanks & greetings, Hanno
Re: vote
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 11:03:11PM -0700, Ivan E. Moore II wrote: > ok... Potato users be heard (woody users are stuck with what I give you) :) > >option 1: upgrade potato .deb's to 2.1-beta1+ (ie..move from stable to > cvs snapshots as I am doing with woody) > >option 2: create a seperate repository on kde.tdyc.com for kde 2.1 potato > .deb's. > >option 3: wait for 2.1's release to do potato debs > > (note...when I start making 2.1 debs for potato I will no longer be able > to make 2.0.1 debs) > >Due to my network snafu I ended up being a day behind in uploads for > woody.. > which actually ends up being a good thing. :) (at least IMO)...in the 24hrs > to follow beta1 a bunch of bug fixes have been made including one very > annoying > one with email configuration. (plus 24hrs more of me cleaning things up) > > so..your choice. > > Ivan > I would prefer option 2: freeze kde 2.0.1 for potato: only securety updates and some important bugs (as the not working kdm shutdown thing). Then make it the "stable" kde for potato and only work on 2.1beta and 2.1. Maybe I'm wrong, but it is probably less work for you to have the same kde for potato and woody. It's really great work you are doing. Regards Wolfgang Walter
Re: vote
On Friday 15 December 2000 00:39, Myles Green wrote: > On Thursday 14 December 2000 23:03, Ivan E. Moore II wrote: > > ok... Potato users be heard (woody users are stuck with what I give > > you) :) > > > > > so..your choice. > > I would prefer option 3: wait for 2.1's release to do potato debs, > but would settle for otion 2. Me three. -- Bud Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.sirinet.net/~budr/zamm.html All things in moderation. And not too much moderation either.
Re: vote
El Vie 15 Dic 2000 07:39, Myles Green escribi: >On Thursday 14 December 2000 23:03, Ivan E. Moore II wrote: >> ok... Potato users be heard (woody users are stuck with what I give >> you) :) > > > >> so..your choice. > >I would prefer option 3: wait for 2.1's release to do potato debs, but >would settle for otion 2. I like this proposal. I vote for it. Pablo -- _ Pablo de Vicente ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.oan.es (Spain
Re: vote
I vote for option 2, out of conservative fear. Quim On Fri, 15 Dec 2000, Jan Warnking wrote: > > If I have a coice, I prefer stable packages over new features (within > reasonable limits - I guess you could argue that I really should be > running KDE1 then...). After all, that's why I'm running Potato, not > Woody. > I'd vote for option 2, if (or once) Ivan got the impression that the 2.0.x > packages have settled down completely, and there is nothing more to fix > there from a packaging point of view. Is upstream work still continuing on > the bugfix branch (towards a 2.0.2) ? > > Cheers, Jan > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
Re: vote
> >option 3: wait for 2.1's release to do potato debs I'm actually going to go with Option 2...2 archives (both 2.0.1 and 2.1) > If I have a coice, I prefer stable packages over new features (within > reasonable limits - I guess you could argue that I really should be > running KDE1 then...). After all, that's why I'm running Potato, not > Woody. > I'd vote for option 2, if (or once) Ivan got the impression that the 2.0.x > packages have settled down completely, and there is nothing more to fix > there from a packaging point of view. Is upstream work still continuing on > the bugfix branch (towards a 2.0.2) ? there is no 2.0.2...2.0.2. In fact, one of the main reasons 2.0.1 isn't as stable as it could be for potato is that I'm mixing 2.1 with 2.0.1... for example...the kdm that comes with 2.0.1 has issues...so to fix those issues I'm have been backporting the 2.1 version which is far more complete and is much much better. But, it's a new port so it has bugs (which are getting worked out extremly fast). Same thing with a few other packages (knode, kpackage, kmail) I've been very selective in this...but it still leads to some uncertainty... Plus it doesn't help that we have been lab mice for i18n patches to QT and KDE. IMO very few bug fixes with into 2.0.1 after 2.1 kicked off...there were some major fixes and some security fixes but it was mostly for i18n work. 2.0.1 is not something that Debian would call stable...it has too many major bugs... If Debian were to freeze woody right now I would be quickly uploading 2.1-beta1 :) Now...what I plan on doing is to do 1 more round of 2.0.1 packages. These will be built on top of QT 2.2.3 and will have more fixes to the stuff I've back ported plus some other things I've been fixing. Once I get these packages done I'll be immediatly moving on to 2.1-beta1 packages. -- Ivan E. Moore II [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://snowcrash.tdyc.com GPG KeyID=90BCE0DD GPG Fingerprint=F2FC 69FD 0DA0 4FB8 225E 27B6 7645 8141 90BC E0DD
Re: vote
>option 3: wait for 2.1's release to do potato debs If I have a coice, I prefer stable packages over new features (within reasonable limits - I guess you could argue that I really should be running KDE1 then...). After all, that's why I'm running Potato, not Woody. I'd vote for option 2, if (or once) Ivan got the impression that the 2.0.x packages have settled down completely, and there is nothing more to fix there from a packaging point of view. Is upstream work still continuing on the bugfix branch (towards a 2.0.2) ? Cheers, Jan
Re: vote
> > > I would prefer option 3: wait for 2.1's release to do potato debs, but > > > would settle for otion 2. > > > > I vote for this too. > Anyway I think 2.1 is not going to include things 2.0.1 (like kde pim for > example) so I think it would be a good thing, in any case to not blow away > 2.0.1 debs. > So my vote really is to wait for 2.1 release and once it's out make a > separate repository for it, stop building 2.0.1 packages but keep the last > built avaliable. 2 things about this... 2.1 will have kdepim... 2.1-beta1 does not... I have no plans on removing anything that does not have a replacement... for example...korganizer is not ready (and doesn't build out of the box) so the deb is not going anywhere. 2.0.1 packages can run on a 2.1 system. (I'm still using 2.0.1 korg on my 2.1 system with no problems (other than the probs it has) Ivan Ivan E. Moore II [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://snowcrash.tdyc.com GPG KeyID=90BCE0DD GPG Fingerprint=F2FC 69FD 0DA0 4FB8 225E 27B6 7645 8141 90BC E0DD
Re: vote
On Vie 15 Dic 2000 08:04, Daniel de los Reyes wrote: > On Vie 15 Dic 2000 07:39, Myles Green wrote: > > On Thursday 14 December 2000 23:03, Ivan E. Moore II wrote: > > > ok... Potato users be heard (woody users are stuck with what I give > > > you) :) > > > > > > > > > so..your choice. > > > > I would prefer option 3: wait for 2.1's release to do potato debs, but > > would settle for otion 2. > > I vote for this too. Anyway I think 2.1 is not going to include things 2.0.1 (like kde pim for example) so I think it would be a good thing, in any case to not blow away 2.0.1 debs. So my vote really is to wait for 2.1 release and once it's out make a separate repository for it, stop building 2.0.1 packages but keep the last built avaliable. -- __ Daniel de los Reyes S2-Selling Soluciones Valencia Spain e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Powered by Debian GNU-Linux 2.2r2 __
Re: vote
On Vie 15 Dic 2000 07:39, Myles Green wrote: > On Thursday 14 December 2000 23:03, Ivan E. Moore II wrote: > > ok... Potato users be heard (woody users are stuck with what I give > > you) :) > > > > > so..your choice. > > I would prefer option 3: wait for 2.1's release to do potato debs, but > would settle for otion 2. I vote for this too. -- __ Daniel de los Reyes S2-Selling Soluciones Valencia Spain e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Powered by Debian GNU-Linux 2.2r2 __
Re: vote
On Thursday 14 December 2000 23:03, Ivan E. Moore II wrote: > ok... Potato users be heard (woody users are stuck with what I give > you) :) > so..your choice. I would prefer option 3: wait for 2.1's release to do potato debs, but would settle for otion 2. -- Myles Green Calgary AB Canada http://linuxsteps.webjump.com/ --
