Thank you for taking the time to report this issue.

This is an issue that needs to be addressed by the upstream developers. Please report this at http://bugs.kde.org and then add the upstream report information to this report.  We will monitor the upstream report for a resolution to this issue, and will review any bug fixes that become available for consideration in future updates.

Setting status to NEEDINFO, and awaiting upstream bug report URL for tracking.

Thanks in advance.

-- 
Steven M. Parrish - KDE Triage Master
                  - PackageKit Triager
Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers

(In reply to comment #1)
> Thank you for taking the time to report this issue.
> 
> This is an issue that needs to be addressed by the upstream developers. Please
> report this at http://bugs.kde.org and then add the upstream report information
> to this report.  We will monitor the upstream report for a resolution to this
> issue, and will review any bug fixes that become available for consideration in
> future updates.
Thank you robot for doing a bad job. This bug is know to upstream for a very long time.

> Setting status to NEEDINFO, and awaiting upstream bug report URL for tracking.
Thanks, I am not interested in solving your bugs.

Why should _we_ be interested in solving _your_ bugs with such an attitude?

And just a note from the robot, if you have no intent on working with us to get things reported to the upstream devs where it will do some good, how about just not reporting any more issues to us.  I think Ubuntu could use a new fanboy.

-- 
Steven M. Parrish - KDE Triage Master
                  - PackageKit Triager
Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers

Ralf, if you're aware of an upstream bug already tracking this (ideally with a patch, fix, workaround), I'd be interested in seeing it.

(In reply to comment #3)
> Why should _we_ be interested in solving _your_ bugs with such an attitude?  
It's your package, which is broken - It's your job to hunt down bugs in your package.

(In reply to comment #5)
> Ralf, if you're aware of an upstream bug already tracking this (ideally with a
> patch, fix, workaround), I'd be interested in seeing it.  
Check upstream, check openSUSE, googling helps.

Read my original report (It carries a link).

Reopening - Closing a bug just because its Fedora maintainer is unable to go after a bug is non-tolerable.

Debian isn't upstream here.  bugs.kde.org is.

(In reply to comment #8)
> Debian isn't upstream here.  bugs.kde.org is.  

http://www.k3b.org is upstream.

And if you had checked what other distros with better kde integration do: openSUSE is about to upgrade to 1.66.0

What's not tolerable are personal attacks.  Do so at your own peril.


Regarding 1.66.0, k3b upstream developers asked us to not use it, their opinion was that it was not ready (being an alpha/pre release), see also,
http://rdieter.livejournal.com/15770.html

We try to listen and talk to our upstreams, what other distros do is their business.

OK, here was the clue,
http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=65970

Seems  transcode >=1.1.0 doesn't support --progress_rate 0 for whatever reason

Filed bug,
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=845

We'll see what the transcode maintainer has to comment.

(In reply to comment #10)
> What's not tolerable are personal attacks.  Do so at your own peril.
> 
> 
> Regarding 1.66.0, k3b upstream developers asked us to not use it, their opinion
> was that it was not ready (being an alpha/pre release), see also,
> http://rdieter.livejournal.com/15770.html
Fact is: openSUSE switches.

> We try to listen and talk to our upstreams, what other distros do is their
> business.  
Facts are: You are shipping a dysfunctional application and seem unable to fix its bugs. Instead you prefer to flame and push around bug reporters.



(In reply to comment #11)
> https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=845
> 
> We'll see what the transcode maintainer has to comment.  
Why don't you patch k3b not to emit --progress-rate=0 calls?

Ralf,
seriously *last* warning.  Any further comments about other people that aren't solely about technical details related to *this* bug, and we're done here.  bug closed, no questions asked.  I don't think I can get any clearer than that.

I sense there is no interest in fixing bugs => closing this PR.

For the record, the transcode maintainer (i.e. me) agrees with Rex that's it not a sin to ask questions upstream... 
  Further I'm not even very sure what --progress-rate=0 would be supposed to do. (print progress every 0:th frame??)
And grepping through the transcode-1.0.7 code (in F-10) I can't even find that option there. Has k3b ever worked in this respect?

The k3b code asks for --progress_rate of:
playbackTime().totalFrames()/150

This calculuation somehow ends up being 0, and that's bad.

even better, later on... progress is displayed

int progress = 100 * encodedFrames / ...playbackTime().totalFrames()

win!

I believe this has been fixed in k3b already, see
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=182725
but the solution  has not been propagated yet.

upstreamed referenced patch to k3b trunk, working on an update...

k3b-1.0.5-11.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/k3b-1.0.5-11.fc12

k3b-1.0.5-9.fc11.1 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/k3b-1.0.5-9.fc11.1

k3b-1.0.5-11.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 testing repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
 If you want to test the update, you can install it with 
 su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update k3b'.  You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/k3b-1.0.5-11.fc12

k3b-1.0.5-9.fc11.1 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 testing repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
 If you want to test the update, you can install it with 
 su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update k3b'.  You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/k3b-1.0.5-9.fc11.1

This message is a reminder that Fedora 11 is nearing its end of life.
Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining
and issuing updates for Fedora 11.  It is Fedora's policy to close all
bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained.  At that time
this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 
'version' of '11'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' 
to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 11's end of life.

Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that 
we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 11 is end of life.  If you 
would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it 
against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this 
bug to the applicable version.  If you are unable to change the version, 
please add a comment here and someone will do it for you.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's 
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events.  Often a 
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes 
bugs or makes them obsolete.

The process we are following is described here: 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping

k3b-1.0.5-9.fc11.1 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

k3b-1.0.5-11.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.