Groklaw has interviewed KDE about some recent misconceptions about KDE 4. "There has been a bit of a dustup about KDE 4.0. A lot of opinions have been expressed, but I thought you might like to hear from KDE. So I wrote to them and asked if they'd be willing to explain their choices and answer the main complaints. They graciously agreed."
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-12-21
No, he's not. And he is, probably full knowingly, misinterpreting the quote. What is being said is that the time KDE developers spend on new features could not be spent on lower level stuff like the usual whiners keep pretending. He makes it appear to be about QA and how FOSS developers don't test/debug their code.
I'm sorry, but the fact of the matter is that in the real world FOSS software is in that regard usually better off than its commercial counterpart.
Member since:2006-02-05
Depends on what software. Low level infrastructure stuff, I would agree. High level GUI stuff however is usually buggy as hell, and it is like pulling teeth to get anyone in the project to listen to you.
Member since:2005-08-12
You haven't heard that 99% of software development rules are only treated as rules to be followed in La-la land? 
It's a noble sentiment, no doubt.
That being the case it isn't even remotely true, look at the love 3.5 received, the maintenance releases for 4.0, etc. 4.1 has found a healthy balance between additions & fixing.
Edited 2008-07-13 21:21 UTC
Member since:2005-07-06
Unfortunately, he's completely wrong and has probably been getting screwed over with every .0 release of software he's ever bought into. Beta testing of new versions is always done on early adopters (an unwritten and accepted rule), even when you live in a world where money is handed over and you expect to get a finished piece of software with all the features promised. In the open source world, it's the only way things can work. People use a piece of open source software, and distros tend to ship it, when it's good enough and the vast majority use it on that basis, and that's the way the layered system tends to work.
For some reason, Apple did exactly this for about two or three revisions after OS X 10.0 (commercial software, at that), and with hindsight everyone seems to think that Apple's approach is brilliant and there are no complaints. Go figure. All KDE did was admit up front that this is the way things are in the software world.
Edited 2008-07-13 21:34 UTC
Member since:2005-07-06
For some reason, Apple did exactly this for about two or three revisions after OS X 10.0 (commercial software, at that), and with hindsight everyone seems to think that Apple's approach is brilliant and there are no complaints. Go figure. All KDE did was admit up front that this is the way things are in the software world.
Apple was heavily criticized for this approach in 10.0 and the free 10.1 release. 10.2 reduced the criticism significantly but it was not until 10.3 that the very loud criticism died out, and for good reason. People do not much bother complaining about 10.0 now because it is past and memories in computer culture are short.
By the same token once the KDE team releases a decent version of KDE4 (and 4.1 is not it) then over a bit of time the furor over 4.0 will die down simply for the fact there is no point in continuing to complain.
Member since:
2006-01-11
<quote>
Socially speaking, it assumes redirecting development effort is effective. To a certain extent it is, but for quite a few developers not developing features often means not developing at all. Not everybody is good at low-level stuff (or willing to do it). This has bitten us and other projects in the past and present. The development of KDE 4 has been slower than it would've been if we would be able/willing to force developers to work on whatever some top-down managers think is good...but it's just not how FOSS works.
Have you guys heard of the old 20/80 rule? You spend 20% of your time implementing your features. Then 80% of the time testing them and debugging them. What you've pretty much told me in this paragraph is that you guys only do the 20 part, and nobody wants to do the 80 part, and that's how FOSS works. Thanks, really. You've explained a lot.
</quote>
He is right!