Xarchiver 0.5.0rc1 released

[Vincent]

On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 2:18 PM, Giuseppe Torelli <colossus73 at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Christoph Wickert
> <christoph.wickert at googlemail.com> wrote:
> > ... but unfortunately introduced many new bugs when you implemented the
> > tabs. I already downgraded XA in Fedora once because of
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=230154
>
> The one quoted in the bug was a development version. It's expected by
> such release to be unstable and so to crash often.
> You don't know this Christoph?


I shouldn't be getting involved in this, but try to be reasonable. You
suggested that the problems mentioned were fixed in the development version;
Cristoph then pointed out that there are some critical bugs in this so
that's of no use as long as it's still unstable.


>
>
> > and I don't want to do this again. I will update the package as soon as
> > 0.5.0 becomes stable, but at the moment IMHO there is no usable version:
> > r28502 is crashing all the time and r27962 that you recommend does not
> > crash, but it does not extract files ether and instead displays an error
> > message.
>
> It doesn't crash on my system, I can't be aware of bugs which don't occur
> can I?


...of course that doesn't mean the bug is not present for other users. It
might be difficult to solve the bug this way, however, it still means
Cristoph can't package it.


>
>
> >> Also Xarchiver is FULLY developed,
> > IMO 'fully developed' means that there is a stable release where all the
> > features work as expected. Also with annoyances like bug 4535 I would
> > not call an app 'fully developed'.
>
> IMO "fully developed" means that the developers are constantly working
> at it, by adding new features or fixing the bugs that occurs on their
> system.
>

What you mean is "being worked on", what Cristoph means is "finished
development" - just a matter of terminology. I'd argue most people would
tend to intrepret "fully developed" Christoph's way - as such, the comments
won't do much harm.


>
> > I'd appreciate if you focus on stability instead of new features. I can
> > send more backtraces and bugs of both r27962 and latest svn, but I first
> > want to wait if your are going to close my reports INVALID again.
> >
> > Please don't take this as a flame. I see much has been done in svn
> > lately, but as long as XA is crashing all the time I have no other
> > option but to stick with the old version in Fedora.
>
> >From the way you're repling you are already flaming Christoph. If you
> want stability, contribute to the code instead of speaking only, ok?
>

He was merely pointing out the reasons he's not packaging it (so you can
work on that if you'd like to have it packaged) - and did so very
reasonably, IMHO.


>
> Bye,


Cheers,


-- 
Vincent
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.xfce.org/pipermail/xfce4-dev/attachments/20081029/5c976604/attachment.html>