Bug#606238: OBJECTION

2010-12-13 Thread Peter Hombach
Hello, On sekmadienis 12 Gruodis 2010 07:30:24 Hideki Yamane wrote: If k3b version 2 is sufficiently stable, why isn't it part of the backports? FWIW, k3b 2 cannot be backported because it's based on KDE 4 Platform which is way too outdated in lenny. I was unaware that KDE 4 i

Bug#606238: OBJECTION

2010-12-12 Thread Modestas Vainius
Hello, On sekmadienis 12 Gruodis 2010 07:30:24 Hideki Yamane wrote: > > If k3b version 2 is sufficiently stable, why isn't it part of the > > backports? FWIW, k3b 2 cannot be backported because it's based on KDE 4 Platform which is way too outdated in lenny. > # And if I'm not serious - I woul

Bug#606238: OBJECTION

2010-12-11 Thread Hideki Yamane
Hi Peter, # Please add me to CC: > I object to the "just upgrade to squeeze and be silent" approach. > Squeeze is not the stable distribution yet, and one should not be forced > to go to testing. No, - it's already fixed in 2.0.0. - I just said "consider", not to force you to upgrade. I c

Bug#606238: [Pkg-kde-extras] Bug#606238: OBJECTION

2010-12-10 Thread Modestas Vainius
Hello, On penktadienis 10 Gruodis 2010 19:07:32 Peter Hombach wrote: > I object to the "just upgrade to squeeze and be silent" approach. > Squeeze is not the stable distribution yet, and one should not be forced > to go to testing. > > If k3b version 2 is sufficiently stable, why isn't it part of

Bug#606238: OBJECTION

2010-12-10 Thread Peter Hombach
I object to the "just upgrade to squeeze and be silent" approach. Squeeze is not the stable distribution yet, and one should not be forced to go to testing. If k3b version 2 is sufficiently stable, why isn't it part of the backports? I kindly ask to take bug reports more seriously. Peter Homb