Re: [kde] KDE's rough edges... what are your experiences?
On Thursday, 2013-10-31, 10:57:51, Ross Boylan wrote: On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 11:54:50AM +0100, Kevin Krammer wrote: On Thursday, 2013-10-31, 11:48:10, Michael wrote: Am Wed, 30 Oct 2013 18:34:56 +0100 schrieb Kevin Krammer kram...@kde.org: On Wednesday, 2013-10-30, 18:00:46, Michael wrote: And on the thread itself, I did not talk about any applications, I only speak of the UI + widgets and its issues. I know the threshold might be fuzzy there sometimes. Right. There are more precise ways to address different products, e.g. Plasma desktop or Plasma workspace(s), but anything than using the project/vendor name is usally already an improvement. So, KDE4 is officially abandoned, great! :-( No. As explained in short and in length :) From what I wanted to know, it generally is. That not all-and-everything KDE-related is obsolete is quite clear. I guess it also depends on the definition of abandoned. Usually that means discarded or remaining untouched, etc. If we define abandoned as no new extensions that is of course a different case. Cheers, Kevin My main concern with 4 is not whether features are being added but whether bugs are being removed. What are the prospects for that? I can see bugfix commits going into the kde-workspaces KDE/4.11 branch so I'd say it isn't a matter of prospects but happening as planned. And has anything been done in the KDE5 cycle to assure higher levels of reliability? Don' know, I am not involved in either workspace development nor the Qt5 porting efforts. Cheers, Kevin -- Kevin Krammer, KDE developer, xdg-utils developer KDE user support, developer mentoring signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ This message is from the kde mailing list. Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde. Archives: http://lists.kde.org/. More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
Re: [kde] KDE's rough edges... what are your experiences?
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote: ... [tl;dr summary, more modular-qt/kde-frameworks discussion] Yay! Duncan, I love you :) Regards, Myriam -- Proud member of the Amarok and KDE Community Protect your freedom and join the Fellowship of FSFE: http://www.fsfe.org Please don't send me proprietary file formats, use ISO standard ODF instead (ISO/IEC 26300) ___ This message is from the kde mailing list. Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde. Archives: http://lists.kde.org/. More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
Re: [kde] Spelling style on MLs (was: KDE's rough edges... what are your experiences?)
Am Thu, 31 Oct 2013 12:40:04 +0100 schrieb Myriam Schweingruber myr...@kde.org: Hi Michael, On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 8:44 PM, Michael michael.the.optim...@gmail.com wrote: Am Tue, 29 Oct 2013 16:20:15 + (UTC) schrieb Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net: Michael posted on Mon, 28 Oct 2013 14:59:12 +0100 as excerpted: ... Most of the time I simply skip what Duncan writes, as it usually doesn't help me personally, but he sure has a great amount of knowledge. No doubts about his knowledge. And I am fine with your level of tolerance when it comes to his writing style and of course what you do with it. As I am new on this list, I have no idea how often he answers your questions or if you even ask here questions. But that you tend to ignore / skip his mails entirely does tell me a lot about how much you like his exuberant mails. ;-) Still, that you do NOT complain about it is your choice. I did just choose differently, that's it. If it annoys you, just don't read it? You don't have to. Well, that does not scale well if I explicitly ask others about their opinion about a rather controversial subject. It is hard enough to accept a thread in the lines of KDE sucks in your own home-yard, to simply ignore some of the opinions and answers given would be just rude and (possibly) detrimental to the whole thing too. @Duncan: maybe a (very short) section of tl::dr at the top of your mails could be useful for many, instead of burying the essential information in the length of the mail. Hum... it sure looks like you like his mails, you even found time to think about a possible solution. Chances are, because you are annoyed. Even if just a bit. While I know my way around in searching and diagonal reading long texts, most people will have a hard time trying to extract the relevant information, so why not put the important stuff in a 3-liner at the top, and keep the rest for those who enjoy reading you? Well, his texts are not only long, they are *needlessly* long! Sure, one could accept that another guy goes two steps up, and one step down, two steps up and one step down while walking stairs. But he could talk to that guy too and try to convince him of doing just one step at a time up when walking the stairs. That would be more economical for the stair-walking guy and the one watching does not go crazy while watching. He might even opt in to not watch at all at some point. ;-) Anyway, I don't see any problem others might have understanding his texts, they are just repetitive and overly detailed. Finding the small pieces of information one seeks is not hard, it is just needlessly time-consuming... and thus: annoying. regards Michael ___ This message is from the kde mailing list. Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde. Archives: http://lists.kde.org/. More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
Re: [kde] KDE's rough edges... what are your experiences?
Am Thu, 31 Oct 2013 14:58:43 +0100 schrieb Kevin Krammer kram...@kde.org: On Thursday, 2013-10-31, 11:45:04, Michael wrote: Am Tue, 29 Oct 2013 14:35:29 + (UTC) schrieb Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net: Up the stack at the application level, kde5 is breaking up and shipping most individual apps with their own version tagging and release timing, so apps that are evolving fast can ship updates every month or even every week if they wish, while already mature apps in primarily maintenance mode might ship an update a year, mostly just to keep them building on current libraries with current tools, with the occasional security update as well when necessary. With QT4 / KDE4, could applications not just build against maybe older qt- / kdelibs which would then not prevent fast-paced application-development? There are already quite some applications that have their own pace, e.g. Amarok and Digikam, so this is mostly an option that might be explored by more applicatons in the future. So it *is* possible with qt4 / kde4 already and not a feature (planned or already done) in qt5 / kde5. To convince other application developers to do the same, no idea how qt5 might help help there. As I guess the most obvious reason for slower paced development is just lack of manpower. Any pointers there that qt5 does actually help? The relation to the KDE Frameworks 5 initiative is that are consideration to potentially release frameworks separately or in smaller groups on individual schedules. When the release of dependencies is no longer synchronized, it becomes more unlikely that things built upon them are released in a synchronized fashion. But, as I said in another posting, this is not definit yet. Uh... even after reading that paragraph several times, I seem to have some issues understanding it. O_o So... come again? Or point me to the other mail, maybe that will clear things up. That means currently qt-but-non-kde apps and desktop options may become more popular as well. There's smplayer, and the razor-qt desktop. Right, there *is*! No idea why the new de-coupling style benefits such projects. BUT ignore the question you might see here, as it will go in a direction which is out of the scope of this thread. Really, don't answer the question, ignore it. Should probably not ask it then ;-) Yeah! :-) But it is kind of hard to make the balancing act between showing Duncan what parts *could* (or should) be skipped and carrying on the overall conversation. The idea was to show him a possible conclusion a person might have and as the reaction to that conclusion would miss the scope of the conversation, try to convince him to not answer it. But agreed, under normal circumstances I would not have written a thing that could be understood as a question when I don't want that question to be followed in the first place. But in this case the idea may have failed or was a bad idea to begin with... whatever. :-) It is somewhat relevant though. Making KDE technology more available to projects currently not using it has the potential of increasing the number of people working on them. Another thing that influences the topic of QA is that part of the effort is to increase test coverage, or, making the tests more explicit (things that got lots of implicit testing through being used by other parts now gain their own tests). As I don't want to go there any further anyway: We'll see. ;-) regards Michael ___ This message is from the kde mailing list. Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde. Archives: http://lists.kde.org/. More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
Re: [kde] Spelling style on MLs
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/11/2013 15:30, Michael wrote: What I doubt, is that all are absolutely fine and happy with his style. Please stop assuming that you answer for others. Clearly you don't. Anne -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlJz55YACgkQj93fyh4cnBfqgQCeLfqzhBQGE/IqVTr25czzIZ60 2bwAoIXkNHGDJP7bTtUoJEUxqHVkSifZ =id8W -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ This message is from the kde mailing list. Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde. Archives: http://lists.kde.org/. More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
Re: [kde] KDE's rough edges... what are your experiences?
On Friday, 2013-11-01, 17:31:33, Michael wrote: Am Thu, 31 Oct 2013 14:58:43 +0100 schrieb Kevin Krammer kram...@kde.org: There are already quite some applications that have their own pace, e.g. Amarok and Digikam, so this is mostly an option that might be explored by more applicatons in the future. So it *is* possible with qt4 / kde4 already and not a feature (planned or already done) in qt5 / kde5. There is no technical limitation now, if you mean that. To convince other application developers to do the same, no idea how qt5 might help help there. Qt5 or KDE Frameworks 5 doesn't change anything, however the reorganization of the platform into frameworks constitutes a change in how the libraries will be handled (as products of their own) which will likely serve as a trigger for other changes. As I guess the most obvious reason for slower paced development is just lack of manpower. Any pointers there that qt5 does actually help? I don't think Qt5 changes anything regarding man power. The KDE Framworks 5 effort might result in an increase of developers spending time on the frameworks, i.e. applications developers currently not working with KDE based libraries but rolling their own. The relation to the KDE Frameworks 5 initiative is that are consideration to potentially release frameworks separately or in smaller groups on individual schedules. When the release of dependencies is no longer synchronized, it becomes more unlikely that things built upon them are released in a synchronized fashion. But, as I said in another posting, this is not definit yet. Uh... even after reading that paragraph several times, I seem to have some issues understanding it. O_o So... come again? Or point me to the other mail, maybe that will clear things up. Separate release schedules are something that is discussed but not decided yet, at least not by all application teams. Cheers, Kevin -- Kevin Krammer, KDE developer, xdg-utils developer KDE user support, developer mentoring signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ This message is from the kde mailing list. Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde. Archives: http://lists.kde.org/. More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
