| 1 |
Hello Ciaran! |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
(On a totally unrelated side-note - how do you pronounce your name?) |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
>> Let's take a real world example: KDE 3.5.5 is old, buggy and has |
| 6 |
>> some important issues which won't be fixed anymore. |
| 7 |
> Yet it's the most proven version on mips. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Yes. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> ...and break the tree spectacularly, causing huge amounts of pain for |
| 12 |
> your fellow developers when they encounter horrible repoman output when |
| 13 |
> they try to do anything. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Yes, all three solutions would have disadvantages for some, indeed. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
>> The solution I favour by far is c). What's your suggestion [...] |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Unfortunately, you didn't explicitly answer this so I gather you're in |
| 20 |
favour of just keeping 3.5.5 around? |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> 3.5.5 was good enough to be keyworded stable at one point. Thus, it |
| 23 |
> can't be *that* bad. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Yes, because at that time, many of those issues, some of which are |
| 26 |
security ones, simply weren't known at that point. Security issues |
| 27 |
tend not to be known from the start (or they wouldn't exist at all :-) |
| 28 |
) but can turn up at any later time. This is the case for KDE 3.5.5. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Best regards, Wulf "grateful for an answer, remembering you declared |
| 32 |
to completely ignore morons ;-)" Krüger |
Archives