Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 18th Jan 2011 22:18 UTC, submitted by alinandrei
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu De kogel is door de kerk. After years of focussing entirely on Gtk+ and GNOME, Ubuntu will finally start evaluating Qt applications for inclusion in the defaukt Ubuntu installation. Mark Shuttleworth announced the policy change on his blog today.
Thread beginning with comment 458927
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Talk about arrogance
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 18th Jan 2011 22:59 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Talk about arrogance"
Thom_Holwerda
Member since:
2005-06-29

Which is what Shuttleworth is doing, by shoehorning DConf support into a Canonical fork of QT, instead of working together with QT and/or KDE devs to find a solution to the settings issue.


Yes, and world peace will arrive tomorrow.

This is a very good solution, and is not a fork at al - that's a bunch of FUD bullshit. All this means is giving Qt devs the option of building dconf support into their applications. Said applications will still work fine in any Qt environment, and as such, really can't be called forks. He's not forcing anyone, he's not dictating anyone, he's just saying: look, we're hiring a few devs to work on allowing Qt devs to implement dconf support, and if Qt apps want to make use of that, fine. If not, also fine.

Jesus Christ the anti-Shuttleworth and anti-Ubuntu talk is reaching insane proportions around here.

Edited 2011-01-18 23:00 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Talk about arrogance
by phoenix on Tue 18th Jan 2011 23:01 in reply to "RE[3]: Talk about arrogance"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

Hey, we gotta balance out the anti-Apple and anti-MS crowd. ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Talk about arrogance
by segedunum on Tue 18th Jan 2011 23:12 in reply to "RE[3]: Talk about arrogance"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Sorry, but I can only interpret this one way and it's the same message that Mark Shuttleworth has given for years that has always ended up in nothing of very much significance happening:

Nevertheless, should a KDE app learn to talk dconf in addition to the standard KDE mechanisms, which should be straightforward, it would be a candidate for the Ubuntu default install.

What this means is that if a foreign application does things the way that we want in a way that we've already decided then we'll be happy to dangle a carrot of inclusion into Ubuntu.

Not helpful, in other words, because whatever way you choose to see it that is dictation in any language - or at least attempting to dictate.

They've obviously now seen the error of their ways over the years with their development platform and path. How much do you want to bet that they end up being wrong over this shoehorned approach until they either change again or go bust?

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[5]: Talk about arrogance
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 18th Jan 2011 23:18 in reply to "RE[4]: Talk about arrogance"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

What this means is that if a foreign application does things the way that we want in a way that we've already decided then we'll be happy to dangle a carrot of inclusion into Ubuntu.


And this is different to just about any other software collection, how, exactly? Are you telling me KDE doesn't have rules for inclusion? OpenSUSE? Fedora?

Come on dude, this sounds a lot like trolling just because you hate Ubuntu.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Talk about arrogance
by WereCatf on Tue 18th Jan 2011 23:34 in reply to "RE[4]: Talk about arrogance"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

They've obviously now seen the error of their ways over the years with their development platform and path. How much do you want to bet that they end up being wrong over this shoehorned approach until they either change again or go bust?

I am not an Ubuntu fan or anything, but even I have to jump in here: your comments sound like nothing more than trolling. They are perfectly within their rights to only include applications that work well on their desktop. After all, Ubuntu IS aimed for the desktop and they want to maintain atleast a certain element of quality there. Thus it's perfectly reasonable to want to only include such Qt apps by default that fill their requirements.

After all, that's what EVERY single effing distro does.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: Talk about arrogance
by lemur2 on Wed 19th Jan 2011 00:02 in reply to "RE[3]: Talk about arrogance"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"Which is what Shuttleworth is doing, by shoehorning DConf support into a Canonical fork of QT, instead of working together with QT and/or KDE devs to find a solution to the settings issue.
Yes, and world peace will arrive tomorrow. This is a very good solution, and is not a fork at al - that's a bunch of FUD bullshit. All this means is giving Qt devs the option of building dconf support into their applications. Said applications will still work fine in any Qt environment, and as such, really can't be called forks. He's not forcing anyone, he's not dictating anyone, he's just saying: look, we're hiring a few devs to work on allowing Qt devs to implement dconf support, and if Qt apps want to make use of that, fine. If not, also fine. Jesus Christ the anti-Shuttleworth and anti-Ubuntu talk is reaching insane proportions around here. "

KDE desktops have pretty good support for GTK applications, including settings.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GTK-Qt

If Shuttleworth wants to integrate Qt and GTK applications on the one desktop, which is a perfectly reasonable aspiration, why not just use what already works?

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[5]: Talk about arrogance
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 19th Jan 2011 00:05 in reply to "RE[4]: Talk about arrogance"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

That's a theme engine.

Read the article again. This is about the settings backend. A theme engine ain't gonna help you there.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Talk about arrogance
by WereCatf on Wed 19th Jan 2011 00:13 in reply to "RE[4]: Talk about arrogance"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

KDE desktops have pretty good support for GTK applications, including settings.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GTK-Qt

If Shuttleworth wants to integrate Qt and GTK applications on the one desktop, which is a perfectly reasonable aspiration, why not just use what already works?


That would mean having KDE as the default desktop instead of GNOME, thus that is absolutely of no help here.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Talk about arrogance
by emilsedgh on Wed 19th Jan 2011 09:33 in reply to "RE[3]: Talk about arrogance"
emilsedgh Member since:
2007-06-21

Just because shuttleworth is letting Qt applications into Ubuntu, it doesnt mean its a good thing for intergration between desktops.

This is what exactly happened:
Qt is now far far ahead of GTK+.
Ubuntu wants to use Qt more.
They do the fastest and cheapest approach, which is also the one that has no cooperation with others.

What happens isnt very sad. We will probably see a few Qt applications which depend on something like libqdconf or something like that.

But the issue is, they could've done much more. They could've helped on a new standard on FD.o for managing settings. But they decided not to.

Please dont tell me that something designed by commite isnt going to work. FD.o standards have worked pretty awesome in the past few years. Its just that shuttleworth and ubuntu kids want FAST results. which isnt the best possible result.

And this is very very insulting:


But I think it’s entirely plausible that dconf, once it has great Qt bindings, be considered by the KDE community.


You see, KDE people had KConfig which is a pluggable settings system for years. And they consider it as a superior technology. Then suddenly someone jumps inbetween and suggests them to use dconf so they could be more intergrated.

Edited 2011-01-19 09:36 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[5]: Talk about arrogance
by phoenix on Fri 21st Jan 2011 19:55 in reply to "RE[4]: Talk about arrogance"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

Exactly. Rather than working within the existing communities (like fd.o), they are going their own way, doing their own thing, with a solution that benefits noone but themselves.

Reply Parent Score: 2