Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

What I wish I'd read months ago about KDE3 vs. KDE4

If a certain (suspected) spambot had not resurrected an old thread at the KDE forums, I never would have seen this post from Aaron Seigo's blog which completely ended all of my anxieties about KDE4 finally and for the foreseeable future. It's all here. And I quote:

Meme 1: What is the future of 3.5?

This year, as with most years since KDE3 emerged, there have been huge deployments of KDE 3 based software. These deployments will not shift for years to come, no matter what KDE4 is. This is because large institutional deployments (government, corporate, educational, etc) typically have 3-7 year cycles (sometimes even longer) between major changes. Patches and security fixes? Sure. Major revamps? No. This alone ensures that KDE3 will remain supported for years. Why? Because there are users. That is how the open source dev model works: where there are users, there are developers; as one declines so does the other. The developers tend to be a step ahead of the users for software that is progressive, but you'll also find that they have a foot in the here and now too (as well as the past, often).

KDE3 is still open in our svn so that bug fixes, security fixes, etc. can continue to be made. KDE 3.5.x is a rather solid desktop system and really doesn't need a huge amount of work given what it is today; the work to move it to the next level is what we refer to as KDE4, of course. This means that the efforts needed to put into it aren't huge to keep it viable. However, efforts that do go into it are welcome.

While the core KDE team will continue to concentrate our work on KDE4 since that is the long term direction of things, it is fully expected that our partners (which include some KDE core team members as employees/members) will continue supporting and even developing on KDE3 issues. The central project will also be around to lend a helping hand with advice and what not; I did that for a person the week before I left for holidays in December, actually, so it's not wild hypothesis but solid theory.

For those familiar with the open source method, the above probably sounds .. well .. obvious. That's because it is .. for those familiar with the open source method. We will find in this blog entry that many of the concerns people raise come from not acknowledging how Free(dom) software is created via the open source method.

Really? And thanks for helping us out with that. For months I've been going out of my freaking mind, posting angrily, trying to get a handle on where KDE3 was going. And there has always been a fairly clear, black and white answer that we weren't hearing. KDE could have done a better job of getting this information out. Judging my my own case, I think that this has been the source of a lot of discord between developers and users, not KDE4 not being ready. In all of the general whining and bitter accusations-- anyone who didn't like KDE4 was accused of being a secret gnome-lover-- and (now clearly unnecessary) fork proposals, I don't remember anyone from KDE saying that KDE expects to maintain KDE3 for years! I would have put down my pitchfork and extinguished my torch... as I do now.

Ah well. Possibly, the KDE team doesn't excel at Public Relations, but I can see know that they're handling the development part exactly right. I don't prefer KDE 4, by which I mean I don't prefer all the versions of KDE4 I've tried up to now, and I'm not really interested in trying any more for a while. But KDE3.5 is alive and well. It's now in "maintainance mode", and that's all that KDE3 users can ask, in my opinion. KDE4 is where the development is happening, and development is the business of developers. We users may wish for a little constancy, but the developer's job is to look toward the future. To me, the surprise ending to the conflict may be that everybody wins.

More in Tux Machines

Leftovers: OSS

  • Anonymous Open Source Projects
    He made it clear he is not advocating for this view, just a thought experiment. I had, well, a few thoughts on this. I tend to think of open source projects in three broad buckets. Firstly, we have the overall workflow in which the community works together to build things. This is your code review processes, issue management, translations workflow, event strategy, governance, and other pieces. Secondly, there are the individual contributions. This is how we assess what we want to build, what quality looks like, how we build modularity, and other elements. Thirdly, there is identity which covers the identity of the project and the individuals who contribute to it. Solomon taps into this third component.
  • Ostatic and Archphile Are Dead
    I’ve been meaning to write about the demise of Ostatic for a month or so now, but it’s not easy to put together an article when you have absolutely no facts. I first noticed the site was gone a month or so back, when an attempt to reach it turned up one of those “this site can’t be reached” error messages. With a little checking, I was able to verify that the site has indeed gone dark, with writers for the site evidently losing access to their content without notice. Other than that, I’ve been able to find out nothing. Even the site’s ownership is shrouded in mystery. The domain name is registered to OStatic Inc, but with absolutely no information about who’s behind the corporation, which has a listed address of 500 Beale Street in San Francisco. I made an attempt to reach someone using the telephone number included in the results of a “whois” search, but have never received a reply from the voicemail message I left. Back in the days when FOSS Force was first getting cranked up, Ostatic was something of a goto site for news and commentary on Linux and open source. This hasn’t been so true lately, although Susan Linton — the original publisher of Tux Machines — continued to post her informative and entertaining news roundup column on the site until early February — presumably until the end. I’ve reached out to Ms. Linton, hoping to find out more about the demise of Ostatic, but haven’t received a reply. Her column will certainly be missed.
  • This Week In Creative Commons History
    Since I'm here at the Creative Commons 2017 Global Summit this weekend, I want to take a break from our usual Techdirt history posts and highlight the new State Of The Commons report that has been released. These annual reports are a key part of the CC community — here at Techdirt, most of our readers already understand the importance of the free culture licensing options that CC provides to creators, but it's important to step back and look at just how much content is being created and shared thanks to this system. It also provides some good insight into exactly how people are using CC licenses, through both data and (moreso than in previous years) close-up case studies. In the coming week we'll be taking a deeper dive into some of the specifics of the report and this year's summit, but for now I want to highlight a few key points — and encourage you to check out the full report for yourself.
  • ASU’s open-source 'library of the stars' to be enhanced by NSF grant
  • ASU wins record 14 NSF career awards
    Arizona State University has earned 14 National Science Foundation early career faculty awards, ranking second among all university recipients for 2017 and setting an ASU record. The awards total $7 million in funding for the ASU researchers over five years.

R1Soft's Backup Backport, TrustZone CryptoCell in Linux

  • CloudLinux 6 Gets New Beta Kernel to Backport a Fix for R1Soft's Backup Solution
    After announcing earlier this week the availability of a new Beta kernel for CloudLinux 7 and CloudLinux 6 Hybrid users, CloudLinux's Mykola Naugolnyi is now informing us about the release of a Beta kernel for CloudLinux 6 users. The updated CloudLinux 6 Beta kernel is tagged as build 2.6.32-673.26.1.lve1.4.26 and it's here to replace kernel 2.6.32-673.26.1.lve1.4.25. It is available right now for download from CloudLinux's updates-testing repository and backports a fix (CKSIX-109) for R1Soft's backup solution from CloudLinux 7's kernel.
  • Linux 4.12 To Begin Supporting TrustZone CryptoCell
    The upcoming Linux 4.12 kernel cycle plans to introduce support for CryptoCell hardware within ARM's TrustZone.

Lakka 2.0 stable release!

After 6 months of community testing, we are proud to announce Lakka 2.0! This new version of Lakka is based on LibreELEC instead of OpenELEC. Almost every package has been updated! We are now using RetroArch 1.5.0, which includes so many changes that listing everything in a single blogpost is rather difficult. Read more Also: LibreELEC-Based Lakka 2.0 Officially Released with Raspberry Pi Zero W Support

Leftovers: Gaming