Linked by David Adams on Wed 2nd Jul 2008 16:11 UTC, submitted by elsewhere
KDE "After the recent release KDE 4.1 beta 2 and openSUSE 11 with KDE 4.0.4, some critics have been especially vocal in expressing their displeasure with the KDE 4 user interface paradigms. The debate has grown increasingly caustic as critics and supporters engage in a war of words over the technology. The controversy has escalated to the point where some users are now advocating a fork in order to move forward the old KDE 3.5 UI paradigms. As an observer who has closely studied each new release of KDE 4, I'm convinced that the fork rhetoric is an absurdly unproductive direction for this debate."
Permalink for comment 321042
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Forks are good
by GeneralZod on Wed 2nd Jul 2008 18:47 UTC in reply to "Forks are good"
GeneralZod
Member since:
2007-08-03

"As long as there is no forking of the underlying core libraries I fail to see what the problem is."

The way I look at it, Plasma is *explicitly designed* to have a new "desktop" built on its technologies: the "desktop" background is designed to be replaceable; the panels are designed to be replaceable; core components like the taskbar, menu etc are designed to be replaceable; etc. As the scripting support and other core technologies mature, these items will eventually be able to be replaced simply by browsing with Hot New Stuff and seeing what pre-made desktops are available.

I'd look on a clone of OS X's dock - or indeed, of KDE3's kicker and kdesktop - written with libplasma as as much of a "fork" of Plasma as a new Firefox theme and an extension that grants it extra functionality is a "fork" of Firefox.

Edit:

Damnit, should've refreshed: Richard said everything I wanted to say already.

Edited 2008-07-02 18:48 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5