Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: m h <sesquile@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] When will KDE 3.5 be marked as stable?
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 17:07:07
Message-Id: e36b84ee0604041004p38c54968vec70f9ed1d7eb5bb@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] When will KDE 3.5 be marked as stable? by "Stephen P. Becker"
1 > If we had an official place where people could complain about ebuilds
2 > not being stabilized, then I have a feeling most developers would avoid
3 > it like the plague. Stuff like this is along the same lines as the
4 > "bump it!!!eleventy-one11!11" bugs which get filed the minute there is a
5 > new release of some program. We tend to hate that, and there isn't much
6 > that could be done other than closing them with prejudice.
7 >
8
9 I'm the OT. So I apologize to all devs whose precious time I have
10 wasted. This post has probably now consumed about 10x as much time as
11 it should've by now. I totally realize that it is probably super
12 annoying to get requests for bumping to stable. And it wasn't my
13 intention at all to put pressure on anyone to bump KDE. I was only
14 curious as to what was holding it up.
15
16 That was my bad for phrasing my question in such a sort manner (not
17 following the "howto ask smart questions" protocol). I figured since,
18 I'm seeing posts about 2.6.16 going stable in "2-3 weeks" and
19 questions about firefox 1.5, then KDE would be kosher as well (since
20 it is arguable on of the most important apps on the linux desktop).
21
22 >
23 > >> I would like to point out that it was you who flamed me for apparently
24 > >> saying RTFM, when in fact if you read my original email, I did nothing
25 > >> of the sort.
26 > >
27 > > You gave a logical RTFM. You're being literal with words when the
28 > > meaning of what you said should be fairly clear. You didn't want to
29 > > answer the question, so you flamed the person who asked instead of
30 > > answering or defering to a more helpful individual.
31 >
32 > Not really. I should have actually pointed out that there is no (good)
33 > place for such queries originally, but I was doing about 10 things at
34 > once, and just sent the typical "don't send offtopic stuff to the
35 > gentoo-dev list" reply. Look back through the archives...this is pretty
36 > standard.
37 >
38 >
39 > >> I merely pointed out what should have been clear to anyone
40 > >> that signed up for this list, that it is not for whining about arch
41 > >> keywording.
42 > >
43 > > Not everyone is like you. There are all sorts of different people out
44 > > there who process information in a lot of different ways. Without a
45 > > stated correct place for asking questions about keywording, it wouldn't
46 > > be hard to rationalise that the proper place is the dev mailing list.
47 >
48 > Except that it isn't the proper place. It is for discussion of
49 > technical matters concerning the development of Gentoo. The closest
50 > place that might be sort of on-topic is the gentoo-desktop list, but I
51 > generally don't recommend that list because it seems like nobody bothers
52 > to answer questions there for the most part. I think the problem is
53 > that the RightPeople(TM) (meaning all the members of the teams for each
54 > desktop herd) probably aren't subscribed there.
55 >
56
57 Sorry I'm not on the desktop list and since I was seeing other posts
58 about marking the kernel and firefox as stable, I figured kde fit in
59 as well. My bad. One solution to naggers like me may be to have
60 dedicated per package wiki/homepages where a status is shown (much
61 like Trac releases). Or at least link to pending bugs. Though I
62 realize that this is probably just more overhead for devs who are
63 already too busy and would rather just code.
64
65 >
66 > > You say it should be obvious like it's fact. Not everything is obvious
67 > > to everyone--Not everyone is a Steve or Stephanie. They may interpret
68 > > conveyed information in different ways and the ambiguity does not help
69 > > at all.
70 >
71 > It should be obvious to anybody who bothered to read the description for
72 > this mailing list before signing up. I can't fix ignorance.
73
74 Thanks for the compliment ;)
75 "General Gentoo developer discussion mailing list" is the
76 description... I guess my post was not general enough. ;)
77
78 >
79 >
80 > > There's a reason devs rarely answer questions. Devs should do what they
81 > > do best, code and fix problems according to SE principles. If you really
82 > > want to answer questions, go ahead, but if you don't want to be helpful,
83 > > don't say anything. Someone else who does want to will chime in with a
84 > > helpful response.
85 >
86 > My reponse was helpful. I guarantee you (unless that person is really
87 > dense) that they won't use this list to complain about stable keywording
88 > again. Furthermore, any currently subscribed list user who didn't know
89 > before will certainly know now.
90 >
91 Hmmm, I really wasn't trying to complain about the keywording of KDE.
92 Sorry if it came out that way. I really just wanted a status update
93 and again, since I saw others I figured it would be ok. In the future
94 I will do the following:
95
96 * Re-read "howto ask a smart question"
97 * Find a mailing list that looks appropriate by the description
98 * Spam that mailing list
99 * Pending no response, find the dev and email them personally
100
101 For the benefit of us dense users, please let me know if this works.
102
103 -matt
104
105 --
106 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] When will KDE 3.5 be marked as stable? Phil Richards <news@××××××××××××××××××××.uk>
Re: [gentoo-dev] When will KDE 3.5 be marked as stable? Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o>