×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

KDE Frameworks 5.0 In Development

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the steady-as-she-goes dept.

KDE 227

An anonymous reader writes "In addition to bringing up the plans for KDE on Wayland, Aaron Seigo just announced at the 2011 Desktop Summit that the KDE 5.0 Frameworks libraries are being planned for development. This central code will be developed in parallel to future KDE SC 4.x releases until it is ready, as to not cause another KDE 4.0 mistake. When the code is ready, key applications will be ported to the new interfaces." (There's another article at IT World.)

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

KDE can suck it (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37017226)

Gnome3 rocks.

Re:KDE can suck it (1)

jonahbron (2278074) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017264)

While I agree to some degree, that's hardly the way to put it.

KDE can choke on it (0)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017698)

There, FTFY

Re:KDE can suck it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37017518)

You forgot your sarcasm tag cockhole.

Re:KDE can suck it (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37017544)

Gnome 3 is a turd... at the bottom of the ocean... covered in little fishy turds...

Re:KDE can suck it (2)

halivar (535827) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017562)

Gnome's mom always posts AC.

Feels early (4, Insightful)

Windwraith (932426) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017262)

Feels actually very very early. After 4.6 being almost identical to 4.5 regarding workflow, bugs left unpatched, and all the little issues KDE4 still has, moving to 5?
Is there a new, breaking release of Qt to catch up with like with KDE4?

Re:Feels early (1)

Windwraith (932426) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017276)

Just to note, I know they are being "planned". Just makes me wonder how much brainpower will be left for KDE4.

Re:Feels early (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37017378)

All brainpower will be on KDE SC 4.

This story is about breaking kde's current libraries into smaller modular pieces, it is not about:
1. KDE SC 5
2. About developing new libraries

Ivan
KDE developer

Re:Feels early (1)

Windwraith (932426) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017408)

Oh, that's a relief, sorry for misunderstanding.

Re:Feels early (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37017642)

You didnt misunderstand, the phoronoix "article" is misleading. ... as often .;.

Re:Feels early (2)

JabberWokky (19442) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017886)

You didnt misunderstand, the phoronoix "article" is misleading. ... as often .;.

Seems pretty straightforward to me:

"Application development will not be pausing as we do this: releases every six months of application improvements will continue based on the 4.x codebase. When Frameworks gets to the point where it is ready for serious banging on, then we will start repurposing our highlight applications to the new codebase," Seigo wrote. "We don't want application development to be held up by the library development, and we don't want the library development to create much, if any, need for 'porting' application code. We want 'just recompile and test' to be the common case, with whatever changes do become necessary to be of the simple and even automatable sort.

"If this sounds rather different from how we approached 4.0, that's because it is. The requirements, needs and context for this release are utterly different. We're after evolutionary improvement and broadening our developer ecosystem, and our plans therefore need to, and in our opinion do, reflect that," Seigo added.

KDE 5, then, will not be the paradigm-shifting platform that happened with KDE 4, a move that caused many Linux desktop fans to throw up their hands and complain that KDE 4 should never have been released in its initial state. Criticism of the KDE 4 desktop still exists (this is, after all, the Linux fanbase we're talking about), but it has moved well past the "immature" and "too much change" arguments that once plagued the inboxes of KDE developers.

Re:Feels early (5, Informative)

KTheorem (999253) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017314)

That's it exactly. From what I have read Qt 5 will not have the backwards compatibility for Qt 3 that Qt 4 does. Too many KDE applications still use those compatibility features and so they need to rewrite it so that it no longer does to be able to use Qt 5. Since that will break programs that rely on those compatibility features it is deserving of a version change.

Re:Feels early (3, Informative)

suy (1908306) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018062)

Qt 5 will be binary incompatible with Qt 4 because they will reorder libraries and modularize them. KDE will do the same with their Frameworks. However...

Qt 4 will require very few changes in the source code. Yes, they will drop the Qt3 support, but very few KDE apps use the Qt3 classes support (of the apps that I use, only JuK to my knowledge).

KDE 5 and Qt 5 will be mostly a major version bump because of the binary incompatibily that can't happen without a change in the major number. Some applications might not need any source code changes, or very few.

Re:Feels early (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37018164)

They all do, because KDElibs do. As a dev, I can say there is a -lot- of KDE3 and Qt3 code left

Re:Feels early (1)

devent (1627873) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018928)

Why can't I install Qt3 and using the old applications?

Re:Feels early (1)

chill (34294) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017430)

How about 4.7? I haven't installed it yet, but the release announcement lists many bugs fixed.

Re:Feels early (4, Informative)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017510)

I think the issue is that Trolltech/Nokia is moving past Qt 4 series into Qt 5.

KDE has maintained that kdelibs can't break binary compatibility between major versions. If there is a significant change with Qt, and thusly major changes for kdelibs, then they have major release number.

That doesn't mean a massive rewrite and change necessarily like we saw with KDE 4.

My thoughts exactly (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37017572)

4 is not even at feature parity with 3.5 yet, not to mention stability. Why move on already?

Oh, yeah. New. Shiny.

I've used both KDE and GNOME for years. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37017266)

I prefer windows. It's more supported commercially and let's face it -- if you prefer a PAYCHECK, you will go this route. Solid.

Re:I've used both KDE and GNOME for years. (1)

Windwraith (932426) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017294)

Not everyone using Linux works in IT.

Re:I've used both KDE and GNOME for years. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37017386)

Obvious, ignorant and retarded troll is obvious, ignorant and retarded.

Re:I've used both KDE and GNOME for years. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37017594)

douchey AC is douchey

Re:I've used both KDE and GNOME for years. (1)

copb.phoenix (1976866) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017600)

If you have a schedule to keep and need a reliable build system, Windows is a nightmare. Not that it can't be configured, but the amount of upkeep and virus scanners and security vulnerabilities to plug in Windows to have a safe environment for a corporate system doesn't compare well to installing the latest long term support version of Ubuntu, popping open the terminal, and typing "sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get upgrade && sudo apt-get install build-essential" In most cases with a machine that's not more than a few years old, it's about an hour to a respectable and stable platform that you can more-or-less trust completely.

And Microsoft is/was the fifth largest contributor to Linux not too long ago, if you want to keep the Microsoft ego when you migrate ;)

Time for a new API (3, Funny)

Chemisor (97276) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017306)

It is clearly time for yet another major API change. People have been writing way too many applications for KDE 4 and this must not be allowed to continue! Having millions of apps is such a waste of effort - we're the Linux Desktop, for heaven's sake, not some lame appstore. Surely everyone can agree that having KDE developers write all the key apps is the way to go. We are the most experienced and the most knowledgeable in using the KDE API, and dammit, WHY WON'T YOU LET US HELP YOU?

Re:Time for a new API (1)

jonahbron (2278074) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017318)

Why can't I mod funny and insightful?

Re:Time for a new API (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37017364)

I would seriously consider KDE if they rewrote their frameworks into C#. Mono is clearly on the rise towards becoming the standard development environment on Linux and making KDE available in the .NET world would make it interesting not only to geeks but to the entire business sector.

LOL (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37017400)

Yeah, let's use a patent riddled shitty clone of something Microsoft themselves are dumping.

Brilliant!

Re:LOL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37017472)

Heh, it makes you wander what's not patented these days.

Seriously though, I think that a garbage-collected managed environment like .NET (but not necessarily it) that was treated as a first class citizen on Linux and that would be available by default with every distribution would benefit Linux adoption. I love hacking around with C/C++ but it's not something that I would expect from Big Business. I would love to see more development in this field. Mono is right now the best candidate and personally I think it's a really good one.

Re:LOL (1)

RobbieThe1st (1977364) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018520)

Isn't this sort of what Python is? It allows easy to write code, is available most everywhere, and allows for cross-platform apps - an x86 compatible Python app will generally work on ARM as well.
Also, modules for everything.

Re:Time for a new API (1)

smash (1351) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018682)

The old bush "mission accomplished" JPEG springs to mind (with regards to moving to KDE5, KDE4 is finished, or something).

Re:Time for a new API (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37018720)

There must be features that are impractical to shoehorn into the old API. Either it is too inefficient, or UI design philosophy is radically different, and there isn't enough consideration built into old apps in order to interpret them. Or both. Anyone have any insight?

I hope they make it like 3.5! (4, Interesting)

Lord Lode (1290856) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017312)

It would be awesome if 5.0 were more like 3.5 again (its behaviour and settings), but with the modern graphics features of 4.0 :)

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5! (2)

zixxt (1547061) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017432)

I just don't get the love for the 3.5 series. I liked 3.5.x and used almost everyday, but 4.x series is sooo much better in terms of speed, looks and apps. The KDE 4 series is IMHO right behind the Mac OS X in terms of goodness.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37017500)

I think most people who long for the past truly forgot what it really was like. I never thought kde 3.5 was all that great, but think 4.5 was great.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5! (1)

ripdajacker (1167101) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017538)

I think it's a reaction to a series of bad 4.0 - 4.5/6 releases. KDE 3.5 was the pinnacle of a very long development, and at the time it was, at least for me, vastly more compelling than the alternatives. KDE4x runs faster indeed, and the looks are a welcome change, but then again I do enjoy the occasional 3.5 session.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5! (1)

oddiofile (1009081) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018232)

KDE 4.6.5, the version I just updated to, has the one last annoying thing fixed that I could do in KDE 3.5: Drag and drop files and folders into the desktop. The "Show Folders" Desktop Widget is finally a proper drop target, and that makes my KDE4 desktop work more like KDE3.5 did.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5! (1)

Lord Kano (13027) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017552)

I think most people who long for the past truly forgot what it really was like. I never thought kde 3.5 was all that great, but think 4.5 was great.

Clearly, our opinions differ but I haven't forgotten anything about what the past was like. I still use Trinity KDE 3.5.x on my linux machines. I despise KDE4.x.

LK

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5! (1)

Lord Kano (13027) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017568)

I just don't get the love for the 3.5 series. I liked 3.5.x and used almost everyday, but 4.x series is sooo much better in terms of speed, looks and apps. The KDE 4 series is IMHO right behind the Mac OS X in terms of goodness.

I think that may be why you like KDE 4.x. I am a former Mac user, just like former smokers, there are fewer harsher critics of Apple than their former users. I lost interest in the direction they were taking the UI back in the original OSX days. I haven't looked back since. I feel the same way about KDE 4.x, I find it less usable than KDE 3.5.x. I don't want the UI to get in my way and that's how it feels to me when I try to use KDE 4.x.

LK

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5! (3, Informative)

marcosdumay (620877) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018594)

Well, at 3.5 the plasma environment didn't segfault one or twice when I start my laptop (sometimes locking the X). Also, its applications did have a more sane reaction to keyboard orders (like, if it opens a window, let it have the focus). Also, I could have more than one KDE session without windows appearing clamming that it couldn't lock a file and closing the application I'm using (and if I don't press the "proceed" button, I can keep using the app, no problem, except for the window that stay above it). The possibility of having more than one session open at the same time was the dealbreaker that let me out of Gnome at KDE3/Gnome2 time (before that I didn't give a dam about what DE I was using).

But ok, that second problem appears on a kind of interaction that simply didn't exist at the 3.5 time.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5! (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017530)

Out of curiosity, what behavior from KDE 3 is not possible in KDE 4?

You can revert to a "classic" desktop with icons, a classic Start Menu, and you can configure the task bar to work just like KDE 3. As far as I know, the only feature I recall from KDE 3 that I haven't really seen in 4 is the optional feature of Mac-like application menus.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5! (1)

Lord Kano (13027) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017588)

Out of curiosity, what behavior from KDE 3 is not possible in KDE 4?

I can't speak for the others, but even when it's setup to mimic KDE 3.5.x, KDE 4.x still feels wrong. It's difficult to explain but if it's a problem for you, you know what I mean.

LK

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5! (1)

Ruie (30480) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018340)

Out of curiosity, what behavior from KDE 3 is not possible in KDE 4?

You can revert to a "classic" desktop with icons, a classic Start Menu, and you can configure the task bar to work just like KDE 3. As far as I know, the only feature I recall from KDE 3 that I haven't really seen in 4 is the optional feature of Mac-like application menus.

Speed. Especially if your desktop is 1920x1200 or larger.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5! (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018376)

The OP was asking for the behavior of 3.5 with the graphic features of 4.0.

I imagine if you did an apples-to-apples comparison of speed of KDE 3.5 with Compiz and Kerry vs KDE 4.7 with Plasma and Nepomuk/Strigi, you'll find them pretty close.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5! (1)

RobbieThe1st (1977364) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018534)

This. With 4.5/4.6, kwin is just slow. It'll freeze display output for a fraction of a second whenever any program updates the titlebar(so anything displaying FPS that way just lags horribly). I ended up swiching to /non-composited/ metacity for my WM... now I have a fast, usable system.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37019068)

This. That.

That. This.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5! (1)

wrook (134116) | more than 3 years ago | (#37019148)

I've only tried briefly, but I think Compiz works fine on KDE4.5/4.6. I think it might run faster in the situations you are talking about. I've noticed the speed of kwin is heavily dependent up on the theme you choose. On my ridiculously underpowered netbook (which I like using for some reason) it can be unusably slow with some themes, but reasonable with others. Compiz seems to have more consistent performance.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5! (1)

fast turtle (1118037) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018416)

Multiple Individually configured Desktops - Up to 20 of them. I'm sorry but the KDE devs lost me when the insisted on switching to the MS way of doing things instead of keeping the multiple desktop feature. That ensured I wouldn't have anything to do with KDE 4 because I had multiple desktops configured with various apps/tools on each desktop and you simply can't do that anymore - just like MS never allowed you to have that option. Yes the taskbar is nice but I'd much rather be able to not use the taskbar and simply hit ctrl# to switch to my desired desktop/app while still have the KDE frameworks. A major issue I have is that you can't find an inexpensive standard 4:3 resolution monitor anymore. Everything has gone to widescreen and with 3+ I at least could use some of that real estate by configuring some desktop items to the sides.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5! (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018454)

You can accomplish this today with the usual virtual desktop option, and with activities, which is even more robust.

I'm not sure where you got the idea they ditched virtual desktops, other than the complaints at the 4.0 launch that you couldn't have a unique wallpaper on each virtual desktop. I'm not sure if this ever changed, because I don't use virtual desktops.

Some people prefer the ability to quickly switch to a desktop with a series of applications already open for a certain workflow without having to open those apps/windows again. I personally prefer not to leave a bunch of apps open in the background (especially for 20 virtual desktops as you describe) unless I need them running.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5! (1)

PuercoPop (1007467) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018830)

Out of curiosity, what behavior from KDE 3 is not possible in KDE 4?

You can revert to a "classic" desktop with icons, a classic Start Menu, and you can configure the task bar to work just like KDE 3. As far as I know, the only feature I recall from KDE 3 that I haven't really seen in 4 is the optional feature of Mac-like application menus.

For starters you can't Ctrl-Esc for the 'skull of death' ...
Also at least for me, a semi-n00b user, dbus seems like an emasculated dcop.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5! (1)

Zarhan (415465) | more than 3 years ago | (#37019206)

For starters you can't Ctrl-Esc for the 'skull of death' ...

Use Ctrl-Alt-Esc (or rebind the key).

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5! (1)

Zarhan (415465) | more than 3 years ago | (#37019190)

Konsole does not let you name tabs and titles separately. There's plenty of screen estate in title and I don't mind applications setting window title however it likes via xterm. However, I'd like to have my tab title remain static.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5! (1)

Rhapsody Scarlet (1139063) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017914)

It would be awesome if 5.0 were more like 3.5 again (its behaviour and settings), but with the modern graphics features of 4.0 :)

In a way, it might be.

From my understanding (and from having used both KDE 3.5 and 4.2 through to 4.6) the main problem with KDE 4.x was that it was a complete rewrite from the 3.x series, and to say the transition was rough would be an understatement.

But if what I heard earlier is correct, KDE 5 will be more like KDE 3 in that it will extend from the KDE 4 codebase rather than dumping everything and starting from scratch. Hopefully resulting in a smoother transition and less crippling bugs.

What KDE 4.0 "mistake"? (0)

QCompson (675963) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017334)

I thought Aaron Seigo was still insisting that there was no mistake with the release of 4.0, but that everything went perfectly according to plan?

When should these actually be considered stable by the average person... 5.6, 5.7? Also, are these 5.x releases also going to be termed SCs or Software Compendiums or whatever they are called, or has the wondrous KDE marketing team thought of a new catchy term? My suggestion: Kickass Release of Awesome Power, or KRAP. "Dude, I just dumped KDE KRAP 5.2 on my system! It doesn't have a functioning taskbar yet, but the rotating twitter desktop widget is sweet!"

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"? (2)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017560)

It depends on perception.

I read dot.kde.org regularly, and Planet KDE. Every single KDE dev was quite clear that KDE 4.0 wasn't for everyone on day one, and it wouldn't have feature parity with KDE 3.5 on day one.

Yet every single tech blogger says they were lied to in this massive fiasco that KDE 4 would be perfect on day one. Where exactly was that statement? I think the problem is that a few distros were pushing KDE 4 as a default desktop before it was fully ready for primetime, and Kubuntu in particular was shipping really broken packages.

If you got a KDE 4 desktop before you personally wanted it, or if you had a buggy desktop, then KDE 4.0 was a disaster and the devs lied, even if that really isn't the case. So Aaron is justified in saying 4.0 wasn't a disaster from a developer standpoint. They needed to get a base release out there for people to test, and for developers to develop for. That didn't mean every user would be happy with it on day one. But since people did have bad experiences, you're not going to convince any of those users that it wasn't some unmitigated disaster.

Oddly enough, the Gnome devs have sworn that one of their biggest goals of Gnome 3.0 was to avoid the KDE 4.0 disaster, and they wouldn't push a massive change out the door on day one. And yet you can argue that the Gnome 3 shell is a bigger change, and a bigger removal of features than the KDE 4 launch. And with KDE, most of those features returned in time. They just hadn't been ported over yet. Gnome 3's shell removes many basic features as a fundamental design decision.

In the end, users should make informed decisions about what desktop works best for them be it KDE 4, Gnome 3, Unity, XFCE, etc.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"? (1)

QCompson (675963) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017678)

Yet every single tech blogger says they were lied to in this massive fiasco that KDE 4 would be perfect on day one. Where exactly was that statement? I think the problem is that a few distros were pushing KDE 4 as a default desktop before it was fully ready for primetime, and Kubuntu in particular was shipping really broken packages.

Most notably in the 4.0 release announcement. It didn't state it was perfect, but it sure didn't give the impression that it wasn't ready for normal users. see: http://www.kde.org/announcements/4.0 [kde.org]

In addition, the KDE team had been pimping the 4.0 release for months prior to the actual release date. When the betas were released in a horrifically unfinished state, users were told to keep calm because they were just betas, not the final release. When the final release was released, users were told to keep calm because it was never meant to actually be used by users. When 4.1 was released, users were told to keep calm.... and so on.

I think what actually happened is that the KDE team was very rushed at the end as they neared the release date, and decided to just dump out what they had rather than delay. After all, the google kde4 release party had already been planned and scheduled.

So Aaron is justified in saying 4.0 wasn't a disaster from a developer standpoint.

No, he isn't. After taking a step back and looking at the whole debacle of 4.0, it's simply stubborn to claim that it wasn't a total disaster, or at the very least misguided.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"? (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017730)

Most notably in the 4.0 release announcement. It didn't state it was perfect, but it sure didn't give the impression that it wasn't ready for normal users. see: http://www.kde.org/announcements/4.0 [kde.org] [kde.org]

They made countless comments leading up the 4.0 release that it wouldn't have feature parity on day 1, and that it wouldn't be for everyone on day 1. Just because they didn't repeat those statements in the release announcement doesn't mean they lied.

In addition, the KDE team had been pimping the 4.0 release for months prior to the actual release date.

The KDE team was bragging that the 4.0 release would feature a lot of new tools under the hood like Solid, Phonon, Akondi, Nepomuk, Plasma, etc. Those tools would help developers make killer KDE apps. They didn't claim that everyone was already ported over. Claiming otherwise is the lie here.

No, he isn't. After taking a step back and looking at the whole debacle of 4.0, it's simply stubborn to claim that it wasn't a total disaster, or at the very least misguided.

You have to have a release for developers to build off of. Would you have preferred that they didn't release? It would have taken that much longer to reach feature parity then. And it wasn't like KDE 3.5 disappeared overnight. No one forced you to migrate any faster than you wanted to. In fact, KDE 3.x series is still maintained by others.

http://www.trinitydesktop.org/screenshots.php [trinitydesktop.org]

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"? (1)

QCompson (675963) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018440)

Would you have preferred that they didn't release?

I would have preferred they had waited a few more months and had plasma be *somewhat* ready for day to day use before they crept out of beta stage. There was tons of interest in KDE4 even at beta stages, and there was nothing stopping developers from getting a head start at that point. Six more months of baking in the oven in order to avoid tarnishing KDE's good name would have been well worth it in my opinion.

It was a mistake to rush it so, and frankly the premature release wasn't even as discouraging as the fact that lead developers like A. Seigo are still too stubborn to admit it was poor judgment. That doesn't bode well for design and release planning for the future of the project.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"? (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018478)

And then it would have taken that much longer for app developers to start developing for KDE 4.0 if they didn't have a development platform to work off of. Again, they repeatedly stated that KDE 4.0 would serve as a base for developers, and may not be ready for everyday users.

You claim developers would still develop apps while KDE on the whole was in beta, but that just isn't the case. KDE Planet showed the number of commits and new developers, which exploded after the 4.0 release. Many people were holding off for an official standard. If kdelibs, phonon, plasma, etc. hadn't matured to a 4.0 release state, then many developers would hold off, which is precisely what happened.

If you didn't like the Plasma desktop on day 1, you didn't have to use it. KDE 3 was still there. Slowing down the development of applications for KDE 4 wouldn't have improved anything.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"? (1)

QCompson (675963) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018526)

You claim developers would still develop apps while KDE on the whole was in beta, but that just isn't the case. KDE Planet showed the number of commits and new developers, which exploded after the 4.0 release.

I never said there would the same number of developers working on KDE4 projects at that exact point in time, just that there was still a lot of interest at the beta stages. Exactly what was the massive drawback to waiting a few months until plasma was more mature and usable before release? I think avoiding the entire release debacle would have been far more beneficial in the long run versus being 2-3 months behind in development from where we are now. That's discounting that there may have been developers and users discouraged by the alpha quality of the 4.0 release and turned away from the project.

If kdelibs, phonon, plasma, etc. hadn't matured to a 4.0 release state

Plasma was no where near a release state with 4.0. It wasn't even beta quality.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"? (1)

Narishma (822073) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018598)

The guy was referring to the Plasma libraries, not the Plasma desktop.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"? (1)

QCompson (675963) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018684)

The guy was referring to the Plasma libraries, not the Plasma desktop.

Ah ok, my bad. Obviously I'm not a developer (just a finicky hyper-critical desktop linux user!), but doesn't having buggy crash-ridden software like 4.0 plasma make it difficult to develop and test your own add-ons and related software? If I want to develop desktop widgets but plasma itself was continually crashing and burning, doesn't that slow the process as well?

It very well may not if the libraries are "mature", just wondering.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"? (1)

DiegoBravo (324012) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018462)

I don't understand why people is still trying to justify the official release of an unfinished software. If you know your software is unfinished (not ready for the users) you just continue publishing betas.

Do you really believe the users must read every developer blog for each piece of software in a distro upgrade looking for notes about a final release that at some point is no longer "for normal users"?

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"? (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018502)

It wasn't unfinished. It just hadn't reached full feature parity with KDE 3.5 yet. Holding off on that would mean holding off for probably 2 more years, and holding up third-party development.

Kubuntu was the first distro to ship 4.0. Let's assume you're a Kubuntu user, and you upgrade to a new distro without checking out the changes. That in and of itself rarely is wise. But clearly that is the KDE developer's faults. And the Kubuntu forums, mailing list and website have also mentioned repeatedly what a huge change KDE 4.0 is. And everyone reviewing the distro release are mentioning this. But again, you upgraded to a new distro and never read any reviews, or information about your distro specifically.

That distro made the decision to push something exceedingly new and "unfinished" as the default desktop on day 1. Again, that is the fault of the KDE developers, who don't control distros.

In addition, that distro put out exceedingly broken packages (like openSUSE was putting out very stable packages). That too, is the fault of the KDE development team even though they don't control distros.

Your logic is that if you made no effort to find out any information on what you were installing, then someone else intentionally lied to you.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"? (1)

QCompson (675963) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018568)

Your logic is that if you made no effort to find out any information on what you were installing, then someone else intentionally lied to you.

Your logic is that KDE wasn't intentionally trying to change the way software releases were labeled (alpha->beta->release) and used. Which they were. They moved out of the "beta" stage to a release that apparently wasn't actually supposed to be used by users. 4.1 either for that matter. Blaming the users for their lack of research on the topic is absurd.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"? (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018654)

And yet there are plenty of people who specifically suggest the unspoken rule of software is for end users not to use a .0 release and expect stability. I'll also note that I ran 4.0 even before the release, and didn't have issues. A big part of that was my distro. openSUSE was putting out very good KDE packages. There was a huge trend on bugs.kde.org of bugs submitted from Kubuntu that couldn't be reproduced elsewhere, and even the Kubuntu package maintainers admitted they screwed the pooch with their 4.0 packages. Kubuntu shipped a release without testing it much because the Ubuntu world loves pushing the absolute latest and greatest out before anyone else.

And KDE 4.0 did have alpha and beta releases that preceded it.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"? (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018546)

I'd rather go from a fully patched Windows XP SP3 to release day Vista than from KDE 3.5.x to KDE 4.0.0, perfection has nothing to do with it. When you hit the big release drum you get compared to other big releases like Windows, OS X, Linux, OpenOffice, Firefox and so on, if OpenOffice 3.0 had been as buggy and lacked as many basic features as KDE 4.0 it'd be called a disaster too. Maybe they have the perception that through their blogging their major release should be held to a completely different standard than every other major release, but then their logic is sorely flawed. If you call it a release it will be judged by release standards, something it seems several developers still are in denial about.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"? (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018578)

You're missing the point.

The devs repeatedly said it wasn't for everyday use for everyone, and that it was mainly for developers to have a base to build from. No one said you had to use it at KDE 4.0.

The problem was Kubuntu shipping 4.0 when users weren't ready for it, and even worse, shipping a particularly poorly built/packaged version of 4.0.

Oddly enough, other distros didn't have that problem.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"? (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018956)

You're missing the point. The devs repeatedly said it wasn't for everyday use for everyone

No, you are missing the point. What they said on their blog is almost irrelevant as long as they call it 4.0, then distros will ship it, users will use it, reviewers will review it as if it's a finished product. And then they go "you should not have shipped it", "you should not use KDE4 yet", "you should not have slaughtered it" when people do and pretend it's everyone's fault but their own. And I think you've drunk too much of the koolaid.

"KDE 4.0 mistake" (1)

at_slashdot (674436) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017362)

So finally somebody admits to the mistake, till now users and distributions have been accused that they didn't understand that 4.0 (or for that matter 4.1, 4.2, 4.3...). didn't mean "stable".

Re:"KDE 4.0 mistake" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37017428)

It wasn't a mistake. You don't understand the meaning of "stable" obviously, and the "mistake" in the editorial blurb is just a trick to get the haters going.

Re:"KDE 4.0 mistake" (1)

MasterPatricko (1414887) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017446)

that's the slashdot editors stirring up trouble, not an official kde statement

Re:"KDE 4.0 mistake" (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017582)

The openSUSE packages were quite stable, even before the 4.0 final. I ran the beta packages even before then.

The Kubuntu packages were notoriously bad, and Fedoras packages weren't amazing on day one. In that case, many problems were introduced by package maintainers that didn't understand the new build system or where things moved.

Re:"KDE 4.0 mistake" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37018698)

till now users and distributions have been accused that they didn't understand that 4.0 (or for that matter 4.1, 4.2, 4.3...). didn't mean "stable".

They didn't. It's really simple: 4.0 was not stable, and people were told. Now, it's probably KDE's fault for not realizing how stupid people are (just like it's, say, freetype's fault for not realizing that idiotic users would use bits of the private API), but anybody with half a brain knew 4.0 was a preview release.

Re:"KDE 4.0 mistake" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37018934)

You still clinging on to that? I hope everyone in your life remembers every mistake you ever made, even if it was just a misunderstanding, and brings them all up at every opportunity.

Documantation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37017384)

After reading the Linus/Gnome3 spat, ans still cant find/use all the funtionality of KDE 4.5
we need some Good Documentation, Overview, Configuration, Startup, Common Flows
Session, Plasma. At above Village idiot level. Every time (say once per moth I have to strace/
grep in the sources I get real annoyed).

We need Documentation more that more me too mobile.

Anti-Gnome bias? (1)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017404)

The Desktop Summit 2011 includes both Gnome and KDE developers. Is there some reason Slashdot has posted two stories from KDE talks but none from Gnome?

I'm not trying to start a G vs. K war here, I'd just like to see coverage of both.

Re:Anti-Gnome bias? (1)

obarthelemy (160321) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017584)

have you tried submitting a story ?

Re:Anti-Gnome bias? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37017634)

Gnome had nothing to say, as usual.

They should be unifying KDE and GNOME (0)

erroneus (253617) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017414)

In some ways, it's all good that they are different. But in others, it is harmful. Already there are some standards that the two conform to such as .desktop files. They need more of this and it should be extended to include compatibility for themes as well.

In the end, it should be such that applications written for KDE can be converted or compiled for GNOME and vice versa with little or not change. I realize what I am saying would effectively merge the projects but these two opposing camps harm Linux as a whole. It's not enough to say "Linux Compatible" right now. App developers must choose between GNOME or KDE or even just X. It's harmful for commercial apps and more by having such an environment.

At one point, this competitive growth was a great thing... one was better than the other which would in turn make changes and improvements to surpass the first. But I think we have matured to a point where this is no longer a productive thing as it stands now, I believe it is causing hesitation among commercial app developers.

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME (1)

Hach-Que (1524899) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017556)

What causes hesitation among commercial app developers is the absolutely atrocious state of application distribution and dependency resolution. Every distribution has their own package format (or at the very least, different package names and content) and a different set of dependencies are required for every single one.

It's just not practical to target Linux as a commercial developer when you have to generate and maintain several different types of packages, their dependency lists AND the software repositories to go with them.

On Windows, I can target the largest audience with a single executable file. On Linux, I can target an insignificant desktop audience by maintaining a package for every variant of the system. So who in their right mind would think it to be cost effective to target Linux for desktop software on a commercial basis?

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME (1)

jones_supa (887896) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017970)

Exactly. And not to even mention the constantly changing APIs and desktop environments. Linux is like in some kind of eternal R&D phase...

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME (1)

RobbieThe1st (1977364) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018606)

Of course, yo could just do what Teamspeak, or Unigine or others do: Just release a tarball with the binary and most supporting files.
Any specific dependancies can be handled by the user, or in some cases, just allow the distros themselves to manage packaging your software up.

Seems to work well enough; Most Linux users don't need the hand-holding of Windows users.

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME (1)

Hach-Que (1524899) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018676)

Both of those programs you listed are orientated towards developers / gamers which have a better understanding of how systems work and how to resolve dependencies than the average user. Hand-holding has nothing to do with it; it's just the target audience of those programs already knowing what they're doing.

The audience that the original post was talking about is your average user, maybe not even your average Linux user*. Software designed for the average user can't rely on them to run the program from the command line to see the "ld: library XYZ not found" message and then go hunting for dependencies. They're going to double-click the icon on the desktop and wonder like hell why the program is taking so long to start up. For an example of how confusing this is even for experienced users, you need to look no further than installing Google Chrome, only to find that you don't have libpng12 installed (but rather your distro provides libpng14 by default).

TL;DR It's a terrible installation experience when installing third-party software and average users aren't going to take the time to find out how to resolve dependencies. They just want it to work.

* Because by bringing commercial software to Linux you're increasing the number of potential Linux users as well; as an example, you only need to look at the people who are tied to Windows because a commercial or open source equivalent is not available for the software they use.

Maybe there are reasons why they are separate? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37017578)

Has it ever occurred to you that, just maybe, there are some very significant reasons why they are separate? You know, like philosophical and technical differences, maybe?

It's hard to decide where to begin! First, just look at the main programming languages and UI toolkits for each environment. The KDE developers chose to use a mature, robust, well-tested programming language (C++) and framework (Qt) to build upon. The GNOME developers, on the other hand, made a half-assed pseudo-OO extension to C (GObject), and used one of the shittiest UI toolkits ever developed (GTK+).

There are many differences when it comes to the quality of applications (KDE apps are much better), the release cycle (KDE's releases are far more consistent), the community (KDE's is much more helpful and less ego-centric), future goals (KDE actually views innovation and achievement as important), and so forth.

The only way you could reconcile these differences would be to outright discard one of the environments. In fact, that's happening naturally. That's why GNOME is a dying project, and GNOME 3 appears to be a failed effort. The community has gotten fed up with all aspects of the GNOME situation, and that's why most people are now moving to KDE, with the rest mainly moving to XFCE.

In a way, you will get your dream of a unified Linux desktop environment. It's in progress today. It'll just take a few more years for the last remnants of GNOME to become totally irrelevant.

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017596)

There are many freedesktop standards that cross both Gnome and KDE. Sometimes they can both agree on something that makes life easy for everyone. And sometimes they disagree.

The KDE devs for instance came out with a new systray standard that they pushed for freedesktop inclusion, but the Gnome devs rejected it.

As far as theme support, I know in KDE, there are tools to make GTK apps look native in KDE. I don't know about vice-versa.

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37017958)

How would you go about uniting GNOME and KDE with out terminating one projects entire development teams since both have different view points on most things and Gnome is all into it's minimalistic fetish

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME (1)

Rhapsody Scarlet (1139063) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017962)

Many people have suggested what you just have. It's never worked before and there's no reason to think it will work now.

Your statement about running KDE apps on GNOME and vice-versa does puzzle me though. Right now I've got a complete mix of KDE/Qt and GNOME/GTK+ applications running on my KDE 4.6 desktop, and all is well. They may be using slightly more resources than strictly necessary, but I don't really care about that. Stuff like the Portland Project and the Tango Desktop Project seem to have done their work in making applications both function correctly and look right on my desktop, and Oxygen-Gtk [kde-look.org] is taking that even further by making GTK+ apps look nearly indistinguishable from Qt apps. Probably best to ask someone else what's going on with the GNOME/Xfce side though.

I really don't think a merger is possible or necessary, what is necessary is more communication and cooperation between developers of various desktop environments, and in the five years I've been using Linux (sorry, GNU/Linux, I am a Debianite now...) I've seen massive strides in this. I can comfortably use whatever applications seem best regardless of widget toolkit with no worries about whether it will all function correctly, and that's good enough for me.

Yeah.. key applications (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37017444)

There are still not all kde 3.5 key applications in kde4 ... and now 5 ?
Kitchensync anyone,.. or similar program? How long did it take until i had a bluetooth program in kde4?

Dark ages are coming to the Linux Desktop .. Gnome 3 .. KDE 5 .... so maybe the smaller ones will rise... Enlightenment (e17), XFCE, LXDE ?

Re:Yeah.. key applications (3, Funny)

obarthelemy (160321) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017590)

2011 will be the year of the desktops on linux !

Re:Yeah.. key applications (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017604)

Some of those apps never made it to KDE 4 because they were abandoned. There isn't much you can do about that.

However, there are many new apps and plasmoids that only exist in KDE 4 and never existed in 3.

It also looks like Qt 5 won't be as drastic of a change as Qt 4 was, and that KDE 5 won't be as drastic of a change as KDE 4.

FRIST PsOT (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37017504)

Will we See QUANTA??? (1)

JoeCommodore (567479) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017626)

Been using 3.5 Quanta and still waiting...

I read of the problems/apathy integrating Quanta into Kdevelop4...

How about just fixing the libs in Quanta 3.5 to just work in 4 and 5??? Would that be more doable?

Either that or someone needs to make a suitable alternative.

Re:Will we See QUANTA??? (1)

SIR_Taco (467460) | more than 3 years ago | (#37018940)

I've had Quanta (version 3.5.10) installed since 4.6.... now I'm on 4.7.... don't have an issue

Re:Will we See QUANTA??? (1)

solanum (80810) | more than 3 years ago | (#37019112)

I've had Quanta (version 3.5.10) installed since 4.6.... now I'm on 4.7.... don't have an issue

Same here, but I think the problem is that we won't be able to run the KDE 3.5 version of Quanta in a KDE 5.0 environment, we'd have to install the KDE 3.5 environment and swap between that and KDE 5.0 to use it. It really amazes me that Quanta has yet to be ported to KDE 4 as there really isn't an equivalent web development environment on Linux. I've tried several others and for me as a home user with a couple of small family websites none of the other free (in both senses) web development environments have the combination of ease of use and features that Quanta has.

no "X", no need for desktop Linux (0)

dltaylor (7510) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017710)

Without X support as a major piece of the Linux distribution, it is useless to me as a desktop environment. I think I only have one of seven Linux kernels running on various hardware that do not have at least one application displaying on a non-local X server.

I use "evince" running on a Linux box to display PDFs from a Windows machine's shared storage to a Cygwin X server on the same box to avoid the security issues with Acrobat Reader. Firefox worked well that way for web browsing until the developers decided to only run one instance (fixed by having multiple "users", but still); Chromium still does.

At home I have thoroughly "sandboxed" Flash by having it as a single-user installation for a non-privileged account. Only that account can run Flash and it has no read access to any other user directory, and no write access to any system files, so no snooping in my email folders, for example. The Flash-enabled Firefox normally displays on the same desktop X server as my other applications, though.

Putting X-terms from Linux boxes on my workplace Windows machine is trivial, as is running Eclipse. One of my co-workers even bothered to bring over the whole desktop, starting with a GDM launch, I think. We do this to allow easy copy/cut/paste into the company's dedicated Windows-only applications.

If you actually bother to think about how the display paradigm is shifting back to a (now-graphic) 3270 model, where the back end of an application runs elsewhere and the display is local to a user, with all of the input/input validation and rendering done on the smart terminal (pad, 'phone' ...), then Wayland makes even less sense. It is trying to solve a performance problem (native 3D Linux games, and "cutesy" desktop graphic effects) that doesn't even exist, except in the developer's sad fantasies.

Re:no "X", no need for desktop Linux (1)

JabberWokky (19442) | more than 3 years ago | (#37017862)

Qt has a -platform commandline arg to choose between X and Wayland. It can also be set globally. It is reasonable (given historical choices with regard to Qt and KDE) that KDE may well choose that same option as well.

Lots of fearmongering, and now you are greatly afeared. Might want to wait to see what develops rather than reflexively prognosticate doom.

Re:no "X", no need for desktop Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37018268)

No one really gives a fuck dude. Linux is for fags.

Re:no "X", no need for desktop Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37019108)

So it's perfect for you, then.

Almost interesting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37019146)

Wow - this story is almost interesting. No, wait... actually it isn't.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?