| 1 |
Dne středa 14 Říjen 2009 13:19:42 Nirbheek Chauhan napsal(a): |
| 2 |
> [completely offtopic from this thread, please fork thread if/when replying] |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 6:40 AM, Jeroen Roovers <jer@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > Since the advent of outside overlays and layman, |
| 6 |
> > we've seen many more bugs that only got discovered when the tree was |
| 7 |
> > synced with some developer overlay, or when a Great Unveiling was done |
| 8 |
> > after limited, private, small scale testing (as with many GNOME and KDE |
| 9 |
> > releases, not to point the finger). |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> If GNOME is involved, I would like you to point some fingers and tell |
| 12 |
> us exactly where you think we went wrong; exactly which "Great |
| 13 |
> Unveiling" are you talking about? If you don't tell us what we did |
| 14 |
> wrong, you surely can't expect us to fix the problem :) |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> All GNOME releases are incremental, so in 99% of the cases, the |
| 17 |
> migration path is straightforward. If as an hppa arch dev, if you were |
| 18 |
> inconvenienced, we would like to correct the problem since it would've |
| 19 |
> definitely affected other archs too (and we know how understaffed you |
| 20 |
> guys are :) |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
Actualy i would like to hear what we in KDE did too, we publish into the tree |
| 23 |
as 0 days bump mostly since 4.2 and 4.1 was in the tree right away when we had |
| 24 |
working configuration. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
But aparently thats not enough... |
Archives