Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 21st Jan 2008 18:22 UTC
Ars reviews KDE 4.0.0: "KDE 4.0 was officially released last week after extensive development. The long-awaited 4.0 release ushers in a new era for the popular open-source desktop environment and adds many intriguing new features and technologies. Unfortunately, the release comes with almost as many new bugs as it does features, and there is much work to be done before it sparkles like the 3.5.x series." They were also at the KDE 4.0 release event.
Thread beginning with comment 297102
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Comments Unfair
by sbergman27 on Tue 22nd Jan 2008 12:43
in reply to "RE[5]: Comments Unfair"
Member since:2005-07-24
How on earth did I twist the phrase 'release early release often'
Please address how SVN availability, alphas, betas, and developer previews do not fulfill the function of releasing early and often? You completely sidestep that obvious point and imply that the CatB mantra means that they should "go gold" early and often, which is, in my opinion, the best recipe for credibility loss. And current events, if you've been watching, *do* support that opinion. KDE *has* lost credibility. Not due to the state of KDE4 at this time, which is not bad, all things considered. But because of the poor judgement shown by the project leaders, *and their unwillingness to face up to it*. The KDE community seems to have gone into full defense mode over it, willing to argue the most nonsensical positions rather than admit that they released an alpha as a gold release.
Sure, DE enthusiasts can just shrug that off. But those who are in a position of making decisions on deployments of desktops in business *must* take notice of the level of responsibility demonstrated in the *actions* taken by the project leaders. It's our *job* to take notice of things that affect the future of the deployments for which we are responsible. And the coolness of plasmoids, etc. should not be allowed to cloud our judgement.
Edited 2008-01-22 12:45 UTC
Member since:2006-04-04
Please address how SVN availability, alphas, betas, and developer previews do not fulfill the function of releasing early and often?
Have you actually tried developing on a desktop out of SVN? I've been developing against KDE4 for the last month and a half and having a moving target (which SVN, alpha/betas and dev previews all are) is a pain in the backside. Since .0 I've had a stable API/ABI and a functional desktop that lets me progress with development rather than catching up on continuous system changes.
which is, in my opinion, the best recipe for credibility loss.
With who? The devs like it, the distros appreciate having a stabilized build target and most user won't see it until the distros are ready. So who does that that leave? a handful of people with enough clue to build from SVN, install from dev repos or run a live CD but not enough of a clue to realize what it is they're talking about when they run off to the web to complain.
because of the poor judgement shown by the project leaders, *and their unwillingness to face up to it*. The KDE community seems to have gone into full defense mode over it, willing to argue the most nonsensical positions rather than admit that they released an alpha as a gold release
all of this is nothing more than your opinion, and going by both what you've said here and in other posts, in my opinion that isn't worth much. What exactly have you contributed? Any examples of your judgment floating around that would give weight to these continuous attacks on the works and choices of others?
Sure, DE enthusiasts can just shrug that off. But those who are in a position of making decisions on deployments of desktops in business *must* take notice of the level of responsibility demonstrated in the *actions* taken by the project leaders. It's our *job* to take notice of things that affect the future of the deployments for which we are responsible. And the coolness of plasmoids, etc. should not be allowed to cloud our judgement.
If you have enough brains / responsibility to make these assessments and you're looking further up stream than what the distros support then you ought to have enough sense to not go with .0 release of a major project re-write. All this talk of bad judgment is just total BS. No one is forced to use KDE4. No distro is pushing it onto their users. It isn't the default desktop anywhere. Just because you have a different ideal as to what makes a release .0 ready compared to someone else sure as heck doesn't make you right.
Member since:
2006-04-04
the definition of 'show stopper' is something that (hold your breath) stops the show. If alpha and beta testing reveal no more of these, then it is time for release.
How on earth did I twist the phrase 'release early release often' when we're discussing something that people are complaining about being released [i]early[/]??
I don't thing anyone is claiming the Cathedral and the Bazaar is any kind of bible, bit, you know, its about developing free software and kde is free software, so hey, not that far out of left field I'd have thought.
So, in summary, a free software project, in concert with the opinions expressed in a book about free software, released a piece of feature complete software, mainly so that application developers have an ABI stable base to develop against and people are complaining like the developers individually came round to their houses, formatted their systems and put a gun to their heads and made them install KDE4.0
As far as I'm aware, there is not a single distro with KDE4.0 as anything more than a preview package at present.
Programmers have a stable development environment to work against. Power users get to run the latest and greatest and start filling out bug reports, making suggestions and contributing however they feel. Distros get something that they can start packaging, port their unique apps to. Technically unsophisticated users don't even need to know it exists. And people with nothing better to do, who get something for nothing sit around and complain about other people's hard work on the internet. Which category do you fill?