3 ms·
> I'm afraid that's not going to happen. It was a mistake to ship with all plugins built by default. This will be painful for a year as users annoyingly do not
by tetha 2y ago
> I'm afraid that's not going to happen. It was a mistake to ship with all plugins built by default. This will be painful for a year as users annoyingly do not read the NEWS files they should be reading but there's little that can be done about that.
I deal with enough packages in my life that do massively breaking changes in point releases though, to be honest. This is reminding me of the good days that `apt upgrade` would uninstall the X-Server because nvidia fucked up their stuff.
Debian is kinda one of the places I expected to be better, and usually it does. (EDIT - And I guess the fact that this is causing a ruckus in testing is an indication of that. lets see how it develops.)
- Arnavion 2y agoYou don't have to proactively read it. But when you notice your keepassxc doesn't work as it used to before, that should be a trigger for you to go back and read it, note that it tells you very clearly that the functionality you're missing is now in keepassxc-full, apt-install it, and go on with your life.
- paulryanrogers 2y agoOne doesn't expect such a drastic ... 'fix' in a point release though.
- kasabali 2y agoYou're talking as if it's a point release of Debian. It is not. It happened in sid/testing, that's what these releases are for. Whether it happened in a point or major release of Keepassxc is irrelevant, because ignorant users who upgrade their sid/testing installations blindly as if it was stable-security would have hit it eventually.
- paulryanrogers 2y agoIMO insisting on a change like this would require retiring the original, un-suffixed name. And making separate -min and -full packages instead.