dear all,
it's me again, the testing-remindering-nag-person. this time in the programme... qt4.
i knwo that lots was going on and qt is not in version 4 in testing as well as qt3 also there. i ran into lack of pyqt (4) some time ago but as we now have it (thanx again) and i checked the bugs and could not find any qt(4)-related issues, i would say, we finish this and put it in extra.
lets give the squeaky wheel some grease :D
anybody who knows about stoppers or at least breaking issues, please reply to this email as soon as possible. thanx
- D
Friday 28 December 2007, Damir Perisa wrote: | i knwo that lots was going on and qt is not in version 4 in | testing as well as qt3 also there.
this should read:
i KNOW that lots was going on and qt is NOW in version 4 in testing...
typos when hurrying, i should concentrate more on only one thing at a time, since i'm not a woman ;)
- D
Am Freitag, 28. Dezember 2007 15:47:49 schrieb Damir Perisa:
it's me again, the testing-remindering-nag-person. this time in the programme... qt4.
i knwo that lots was going on and qt is not in version 4 in testing as well as qt3 also there. i ran into lack of pyqt (4) some time ago but as we now have it (thanx again) and i checked the bugs and could not find any qt(4)-related issues, i would say, we finish this and put it in extra.
lets give the squeaky wheel some grease :D
anybody who knows about stoppers or at least breaking issues, please reply to this email as soon as possible. thanx
You are right, there are currently no known problem with qt3 and qt-4. The only showstopper is pacman. ATM pacman does not update the dependencies of a package. And because I changed qt to qt3 and qt4 to qt you will get some strange results when trying to remove packages etc.. This bug is fixed with the upcoming 3.1-release.
Wednesday 02 January 2008, Pierre Schmitz wrote: | Am Freitag, 28. Dezember 2007 15:47:49 schrieb Damir Perisa: | > it's me again, the testing-remindering-nag-person. this time in | > the programme... qt4. | > | > i knwo that lots was going on and qt is not in version 4 in | > testing as well as qt3 also there. i ran into lack of pyqt (4) | > some time ago but as we now have it (thanx again) and i checked | > the bugs and could not find any qt(4)-related issues, i would | > say, we finish this and put it in extra. | > | > lets give the squeaky wheel some grease :D | > | > anybody who knows about stoppers or at least breaking issues, | > please reply to this email as soon as possible. thanx | | You are right, there are currently no known problem with qt3 and | qt-4. The only showstopper is pacman. ATM pacman does not update | the dependencies of a package. And because I changed qt to qt3 and | qt4 to qt you will get some strange results when trying to remove | packages etc.. This bug is fixed with the upcoming 3.1-release.
so qt4 has as releasedependency pacman 3.1. this is good to know! thank you!
- D
Am Donnerstag, 3. Januar 2008 00:31:54 schrieb Damir Perisa:
so qt4 has as releasedependency pacman 3.1. this is good to know! thank you!
We'll see. Last year I thought pacman 3.1 is just about to be released. But it seems to be delayed.
On Jan 3, 2008 5:08 PM, Pierre Schmitz pierre@archlinux.de wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 3. Januar 2008 00:31:54 schrieb Damir Perisa:
so qt4 has as releasedependency pacman 3.1. this is good to know! thank you!
We'll see. Last year I thought pacman 3.1 is just about to be released. But it seems to be delayed.
I think one of the pending things is a german translation. Also, testing is always appreciated. Both of these things will help get pacman out the door faster, and both of them you could help with, if you're waiting on it.
(Side note: de, es, pl_PL, pt_BR, and ru_RU are all pending translations still)
Am Freitag, 4. Januar 2008 00:38:55 schrieb Aaron Griffin:
I think one of the pending things is a german translation.
Afaik Matthias is working on this. I'll ask him if there is still some work to do.
Also, testing is always appreciated. Both of these things will help get pacman out the door faster, and both of them you could help with, if you're waiting on it.
If translation are the only showstoppers atm. I would suggest to just put it into [testing]. Translations do not need to be perfect when testing pacman and it would not hurt if some outputs are still in english.
If there are no critical bugs which might mess up your system it would be nice to see pacman 3.1 in [testing].
On Jan 3, 2008 6:24 PM, Pierre Schmitz pierre@archlinux.de wrote:
Am Freitag, 4. Januar 2008 00:38:55 schrieb Aaron Griffin:
I think one of the pending things is a german translation.
Afaik Matthias is working on this. I'll ask him if there is still some work to do.
Also, testing is always appreciated. Both of these things will help get pacman out the door faster, and both of them you could help with, if you're waiting on it.
If translation are the only showstoppers atm. I would suggest to just put it into [testing]. Translations do not need to be perfect when testing pacman and it would not hurt if some outputs are still in english.
If there are no critical bugs which might mess up your system it would be nice to see pacman 3.1 in [testing].
I've had a pacman-git repo for some time where people can test it out, and we still have some install issues to work out, unless we don't care about wiping people's abs conf files (in all seriousness, do we?).
In addition to that, once I make a release, it is a *release*. Meaning I make tarballs, solidify the lib so number, etc. So "dropping it into testing" works the same as any other package- I can't just update it there every day willy-nilly when people find issues, which is why I want them ironed out before I release 3.1.0.
-Dan
On Jan 3, 2008 6:24 PM, Pierre Schmitz pierre@archlinux.de wrote:
Am Freitag, 4. Januar 2008 00:38:55 schrieb Aaron Griffin:
I think one of the pending things is a german translation.
Afaik Matthias is working on this. I'll ask him if there is still some work to do.
Also, testing is always appreciated. Both of these things will help get pacman out the door faster, and both of them you could help with, if you're waiting on it.
If translation are the only showstoppers atm. I would suggest to just put it into [testing]. Translations do not need to be perfect when testing pacman and it would not hurt if some outputs are still in english.
If there are no critical bugs which might mess up your system it would be nice to see pacman 3.1 in [testing].
We're talking two different things here. Releasing a PACKAGE is totally different than releasing an APPLICATION. I'm positive Dan is well aware of what it takes to deliver a piece of software.
arch-dev-public@lists.archlinux.org