Linked by David Adams on Thu 29th Jul 2010 16:47 UTC, submitted by suka
Gnome During the currently ongoing GUADEC conference in Den Haag the GNOME release team announced that GNOME 3.0 would be delayed for another six months and is now scheduled for March 2011. "We could release in September and have something working that is okayish, but it's not up to the standards we have" release team member Vincent Untz explains the reasoning. There's coverage of this issue at derStandard.at and an official GNOME press release.
Thread beginning with comment 434741
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: This is a good thing
by orestes on Thu 29th Jul 2010 18:29 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: This is a good thing"
orestes
Member since:
2005-07-06

Simple. Don't slap a .0 tag on what amounts to alpha software and expect unsuspecting end users to test it. Continue to recommend distros ship 2.x as the default till it stabilizes and fully support that branch.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: This is a good thing
by stabbyjones on Thu 29th Jul 2010 22:36 in reply to "RE[3]: This is a good thing"
stabbyjones Member since:
2008-04-15

You do remember KDE4 being released while they tried to tell everyone it was beta? Nobody cares if it's not ready yet, it was big new and shiny.

Something happened to me as a Linux user when i switched completely. When software gets a new release i want it. I'll sit on my PC all night if it doesn't work because for some reason I have to have it.

That's why delay is good, keep it away from the ravenous compilers who also complain the most when something isn't that great.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[5]: This is a good thing
by orestes on Thu 29th Jul 2010 22:57 in reply to "RE[4]: This is a good thing"
orestes Member since:
2005-07-06

You do have a point, more than a few distros played a pretty big part in the KDE 4 situation pushing the new shiny code out as default before it was ready. To that end, we can only hope they'll be more responsible this time.

But... the KDE team also made the brilliant move of trying to redefine decades of accepted standards of what a .0 release was.

I'm not saying keep it away from the early adopters who are used to having things break and enjoy it, but for the love of $DEITY don't make it default so that Johnny New User's first impression of Linux is a pretty but half working system

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: This is a good thing
by Soulbender on Fri 30th Jul 2010 05:07 in reply to "RE[3]: This is a good thing"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Ah, you mean like how KDE recommended distros to continue ship 3.x until 4 had stabilized? Funny how so few distros listened to that and yet it all ended up being KDE's fault.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[4]: This is a good thing
by segedunum on Fri 30th Jul 2010 17:22 in reply to "RE[3]: This is a good thing"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Simple. Don't slap a .0 tag on what amounts to alpha software and expect unsuspecting end users to test it.

That is open source I'm afraid. Developers get to decide when they want to release something otherwise you have something like Debian - it drifts on for years. If it isn't good enough then distributions shouldn't ship it, or ship it as a development option at install.

Continue to recommend distros ship 2.x as the default till it stabilizes and fully support that branch.

That's exactly what KDE did do - and it was totally, utterly and completely ignored. That's a problem for the distributions, and one that they have generally failed utterly and miserably at. They ship anything that is >= *.0 and then whine when the bug reports come in.

Edited 2010-07-30 17:23 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: This is a good thing
by Laurence on Mon 2nd Aug 2010 17:05 in reply to "RE[3]: This is a good thing"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Simple. Don't slap a .0 tag on what amounts to alpha software and expect unsuspecting end users to test it. Continue to recommend distros ship 2.x as the default till it stabilizes and fully support that branch.

That's exactly what the KDE team did and, though KDE4.0 was labelled as a ".0", it was very clearly distributed as BETA.

The problem wasn't KDE being released too early, it was impatient users ignoring the warnings and expecting release quality from beta software.

Heck, even the KDE distros weren't offering KDE4.0 ISOs as the download - users had to specifically choose KDE4.0 and read through the warnings before downloading.

Reply Parent Score: 2