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 297210
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[8]: Comments Unfair
by sbergman27 on Tue 22nd Jan 2008 16:49
in reply to "RE[7]: Comments Unfair"
Member since:2005-07-24
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?
Observations. I've made observations. If those observations make some people uncomfortable, then so be it. I'm certainly not against KDE in general, or KDE4 in particular, or I would not be going through the pain of actually running KDE4 on my main desktop box.
You still have not provided a credible answer for why a very buggy codebase with large areas of missing functionality needs to "go gold" before it can be developed against. I do development using the SVN branch of Django all the time. The API is not completely frozen, but the developers are *very* responsible even with respect to the SVN. API changes are minimal, and very well documented. But if the developers of an API take a more cavalier approach, I can understand that you might have trouble with their SVN branch. Considering what the KDE guys apparently consider "gold release" standards, I can imagine that their SVN would be a nightmare. But there is no reason that *has* to be. And certainly no reason that reasonably stable betas and Developer Previews could not be released.
Member since:2006-04-04
Observations. I've made observations.
for example?
You still have not provided a credible answer for why a very buggy codebase with large areas of missing functionality needs to "go gold" before it can be developed against.
I have. And then the following example you provide:
I do development using the SVN branch of Django all the time. The API is not completely frozen, but the developers are *very* responsible even with respect to the SVN. API changes are minimal, and very well documented.
which, if you are honestly offering this up as a comparison, indicates you're not really qualified to even try and make the 'observations' that others may find 'uncomfortable' (bah). KDE is one of the biggest FOSS code bases around. A web framework like Django doesn't even have an ABI to worry about protecting for a multi-year development cycle. And wow, how do they manage to control the API of such a monster? I'm not trying to run their work down, but I do web based development for a day job, I've written more than one framework myself and believe me its a task light years apart from what the KDE guys have achieved.
But if the developers of an API take a more cavalier approach, I can understand that you might have trouble with their SVN branch. Considering what the KDE guys apparently consider "gold release" standards, I can imagine that their SVN would be a nightmare. But there is no reason that *has* to be. And certainly no reason that reasonably stable betas and Developer Previews could not be released.
at this point our conversation is getting repetitive and unless you demonstrate some deeper understanding of the realities of large scale software development then I don't think we have a lot left to say to each other on this topic. Take my withdrawal however you like...
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2006-04-04
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.
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.
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?
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.