Ubuntu Feisty Fawn Herd 3 has been released. Kubuntu and Edubuntu versions are available as well. There's a list of changes in Ubuntu as well as Kubuntu. Final is expected to be released in April.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-01-09
I never quite agreed with this notion that a fork "needs" a reason for its existence otherwise it should be left on the wayside. GNOME started as a poor "response" to the fact that KDE was not Free enough but it kept growing and improving even after KDE was made completely Free.
Now, I don't like GNOME at all but I think that it cater to large portion of users that enjoy its simplicity and I don't see why it should be left behind.
A few developers did not agreed with the way that Compiz was being developed and started a fork... Big deal. It happens all the time in the OSS world. One heck of a good reason is the already mentioned excess of dependencies on GNOME. I would not like to have too many dependencies on GNOME just to have a core feature of my X windowing system working properly. That's a good enough reason for ME.
If a fork is worthy, it will slowly replace the original project as time pass by (See XFree86 / X.Org). If not, it will fail to gather interest and will gradually fall to the wayside until it dies (See the ill-fated GoNEME project).
Beryl fulfills a purpose the way it is. Leave it be.
Member since:
2005-07-12
The reason I figured that Beryl would be adopted is because Beryl's web site and forums seems to mention Ubuntu and the work they're doing to try to win over Ubuntu nearly every post
Lol... ok... so now you're telling me that they're trying to win over Ubuntu by kissing ass, not technical merit? nice...
From what I've read, *both* have problems over plain Metacity.
Well of course they do, you silly goose!/big_gay_al
Metacity is under development for... what?... 5/6 years now? Whereas compiz hit the big time in what, 2005/2006? Don't you think its natural that compiz is still less stable than metacity, given that it's been under development for a fraction of the time?...
The Novell-Microsoft deal also leaves a bad taste in many people's mouths, so many want to avoid anything currently being developed by Novell, lest they put in code that is usable by Novell (because of the agreement) but not anyone else.
Bull... if that was the case then they wouldn't be shipping any application based on mono. And IF they tainted the code the community would fork it, but that time it would be for the right reasons... and even then, Novell would have to comply with the "Freedom of Death" clause in the Gnu GPL, so I guess they really don't want to do that. but lets keep on topic...
I happen to agree that the technical reasons stated for forking Compiz were more excuses than fact, but there were social reasons (Beryl's and Compiz's lead developers didn't get along). It's a sad fact of life that most problems in the world are not technical, their social. The fact that you're still holding a grudge and are willing to switch distros over something that you should be able to install manually without much effort shows how strongly the human emotion plays a part in technical issues.
Well, I tend to be over emotional sometimes :|... Fact is, I'm just an individual trolling away on my laptop and I'm not setting the course of the most popular Linux distro ever... I can afford the luxury of making stupid decisions based on whim alone, but rest assured that if I was in control I would stick to whats best for the majority, and as it stands, Compiz is the best for the majority... If you don't believe me check it out and me amazed.
For instance, if you want to track compiz's progress on the next release, where would you go? One thing is clear though: compiz seems to be a lot less of a community project than Beryl is.
http://www.go-compiz.org/index.php?title=Discuss ??
from the page:
* 1 Forums
* 2 Users' IRC Channel
* 3 Mailing Lists
* 4 Developers' IRC Channel
* 5 Bug reports
Neither approach is *wrong*, but they both suit different types of developers and users.
I never said beryls approach is wrong, but the motives for it's existence certainly are... you don't fork a project because you don't like someone... compiz-quinn was nothing like compiz-vanilla... there was no need for at least 2 config applications, one for each project... well, back in the day there was no config applications at all, but you get my point... bottom line is, there was no need for a fork, especially when the said fork has 98% of it's code based on the parent project and what's even worse is that you won't find compiz mentioned a single time the beryl project front page. Be well... I'm going out now... Friday night fever.
Edited 2007-02-02 22:49