KDE Frameworks 5.0 In Development 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.)
Feels early (Score:5, Insightful)
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: (Score:2)
Just to note, I know they are being "planned". Just makes me wonder how much brainpower will be left for KDE4.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
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: (Score:2)
Oh, that's a relief, sorry for misunderstanding.
Re: (Score:3)
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 f
Re:Feels early (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
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 migh
Re: (Score:2)
Why can't I install Qt3 and using the old applications?
Re: (Score:2)
How about 4.7? I haven't installed it yet, but the release announcement lists many bugs fixed.
Re:Feels early (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Time for a new API (Score:4, Funny)
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: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Congratulations on your sterling efforts to keep up the great Slashdot tradition of not RTFA and getting it completely wrong as a result.
Both Qt5 and KDE Frameworks 5 will be mostly source compatible, it's binary compatability we're breaking, for many apps it will be a simple recompile. The aim is simply to modularise our libraries, clean up the deprecated API, and remove unnecessary dependencies. Your typical KDE app compiled against K5 will look exactly the same as the version compiled against kdelibs 4
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
Because it's neither?
I hope they make it like 3.5! (Score:5, Interesting)
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: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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! (Score:4, Informative)
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: (Score:2)
> Well, at 3.5 the plasma environment didn't segfault one or twice when I start my laptop (sometimes locking the X).
Does that still happen? Did you file a bug? It can't get fixed if you don't file it.
> Also, its applications did have a more sane reaction to keyboard orders (like, if it opens a window, let it have the focus).
Can you give an example? I'd like to resolve this.
> Also, I could have more than one KDE session without windows appearing clamming that it couldn't lock a file and closing
>
Re: (Score:2)
I have no idea on how to report that. Do you get Debian's bugs? What data should I report with a plasma segfault? (any log file? There is a core dump somewhere?)
That specific prob
Re: (Score:2)
Question; which distro are you using?
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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
Fair enough, but could you clarify what exactly you are dissatisfied with? What features are missing? Or is it some usability issue? Or something else?
Re: (Score:2)
I'll tell you what I find wrong about KDE 4.x:
-you can't drag a box around files in the file manager
-the tree of the file manager constantly auto-scrolls left and right (once you manage to discover the setting to actually get a tree in it)
-in kate the search for text has its case sensitivity independent per file, and hidden behind something on which you must click first
-in kate, the search term is independent per file
-it is not possible to get two rows of the "panel" at the bottom, while I want that and it
Re: (Score:2)
-Oh wait, I forgot to mention how bad the unzip etc... integration in the file manager is. In KDE 3.5, you can just browse zip (and other compressed) files like as if they're folders, and use drag with your mouse to unzip it to any destination. In KDE 4, it uses a buggy program, where you can't drag and drop, and that often gives an error instead of unzipping something, so that using the console is easier.
-And it has the ability to integrate a terminal with the file manager, but the feature is useless becau
Re: (Score:3)
* you can rubber band in the file manager ... yeah, not hard.
* weather works just fine with European cities. i live in one, so i know.
* graphics glitches are usually driver related, but we've also fixed a lot of issues (small and large) in the least couple of years
* creating a launcher -> drag it from the file manager, the launcher, from a search in krunner,
i realize that reality often does not come into play much when people create and then post again and again these kinds of lists. really it comes down
Re: (Score:2)
"graphics glitches are usually driver related, but we've also fixed a lot of issues (small and large) in the least couple of years"
That's not a good excuse imho. If the drivers work a certain way, don't expect the makers of these drivers to suddenly do a fix because KDE is stubborn to work around it. I can play the most graphics intense computer games with these NVidia drivers, so whatever KDE wants to do should also be possible with them. And Beryl proves it can, it has no glitches whatsoever. Besides, the
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see what people think is so great about Mac OS. I think the dock is stupid and annoying and the default theme looks like junk. KDE 4 is way ahead of Mac OS in terms of looks and usability.
I don’t see what’s so stupid and annoying about the dock, apart from the one stupid and annoying change in Lion: click-and-hold on an app icon will no longer present all its windows. Admittedly, the new replacement for Exposé takes a little getting used to, but it’s not all bad, even though it now ignores minimized windows. After all, if enough people complain, maybe they’ll fix it.
As for the default theme... well, true, the first thing I did after the upgrade was get my icon th
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
> 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.
You don't mention an issue that can be fixed. At the exact moment that you feel something is wrong, try to identify what it is. If you do, then post back here or reach me from this form:
http://dotancohen.com/eng/message.php [dotancohen.com]
Re: (Score:2)
The most annoying thing for me is the total nonsense of system monitoring, which was perfect in KDE3, where you could adapt values, drag&drop sensors, adapt individual colors and select every imaginable sensor and put it into the panel.
These days you have very, very limited options, no chance to integrate a remote host via ssh, have a sensible readout of stuf
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
For reference, my computer is a dual core 2.66 Ghz, 8GB of RAM, Quadro NVS 160M for graphics.
Re: (Score:2)
Swapping should only occur when you activate a particular window, not when swithcing desktops.
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
I used to use compiz, back on Kubuntu 9.10, and it was great.
More recent versions, however... for me, compiz just stopped working right - it'd end up with a framerate of around 10fps, though enabling the benchmark would bring it up where it should be.
But now, after using Metacity... I think I'll stay with it. Sure, the cube was shiny... but this is quicker, and doesn't degrade gaming performance while still allowing multiple virtual desktops.
Re: (Score:2)
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 a
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
The usage scenario that you describe is possible in KDE 4. You can have multiple desktops and configure a keyboard shortcut to switch them. You can configure a keybaord shortcut to switch to any particular virtual desktop. By default, it is Ctrl-FX for virtual desktop X, up to 12. If you have more Function keys on your keyboard, then there is nothing stopping you from going up to 20. You could configure them to be any shortcut you like.
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
For starters you can't Ctrl-Esc for the 'skull of death' ...
Use Ctrl-Alt-Esc (or rebind the key).
Re: (Score:2)
Also at least for me, a semi-n00b user, dbus seems like an emasculated dcop.
Use qdbus, and it's not that different.
Re: (Score:2)
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 du
Re: (Score:2)
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 :)
You're right! Please let me know what KDE 4.7 is missing for you so that can happen. It's been a good three releases since all my itches have been scratched, but if something is still missing for you I need to know.
Thanks.
Re: (Score:3)
1) Speed - open dolphin window, start resizing. Watch the contents trying to keep up and failing, each part of window moving at different speed
2) In dolphin go to home directory. Wait 15s until *anything* shows up then 5s more until dolphin is actually usable
3) Memory usage: in kde3 kmail took about 50-80MB ram. In kde4 it is several hundred MB for kmail itself, next several hundred for mysql, akonadi server and pop3 resource. After that I switched to Thunderbird.
4) Even more memory usage: run
"KDE 4.0 mistake" (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
that's the slashdot editors stirring up trouble, not an official kde statement
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
Anti-Gnome bias? (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
have you tried submitting a story ?
Re: (Score:2)
It feels like the Gnome people are holing themselves up in their bunker. Reading Dirk Hohndel's thread on G+ was quite enlightening, especially regarding the behavior of the Gnome community. People who like Gnome 3 actively attack and bash people who don't, and those inside the community are keeping mum for fear of being attacked in a similar manner.
After hearing this I put Fedora 15 with Gnome 3 in a VM, and immediately I'm put off by some of the changes, here's just a few in my experience:
- The desktop it
Will we See QUANTA??? (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
I've had Quanta (version 3.5.10) installed since 4.6.... now I'm on 4.7.... don't have an issue
Re: (Score:2)
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 ha
One request (Score:2)
Keep the ability to choose whether you want a tablet-oriented interface or not.
That's one of the reasons why many people don't consider Unity and Gnome 3 alternatives anymore.
In KDE's effort to improve your desktop experience (Score:2)
The team announced that they will be removing the mouse, instead of the mouse users are expected to use a tiny window on the screen called "the mouse", and the team said most users would not notice once they got used to it. In other news the team also announced they solved what some have perceived as annoying action where the controls for widgets would jump out like a light show.
Re: (Score:2)
Not everyone using Linux works in IT.
Re: (Score:2)
Ya know 99% of the time all you have to do is a system restore and your back and running in less time than a smoke break, I just love it when people make out this HUGE deal with windows, like 90% of the world hasn't been using it for the last couple decades or anything.
Re: (Score:3)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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. Clai
Re: (Score:2)
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 a
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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 a
Re: (Score:2)
The guy was referring to the Plasma libraries, not the Plasma desktop.
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
You don't need the Plasma desktop to develop and test Plasma widgets, you only need the libraries. The Plasma desktop itself uses those libraries.
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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 hug
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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 standa
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:3)
Gnome's mom always posts AC.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Yeah.. key applications (Score:4, Funny)
2011 will be the year of the desktops on linux !
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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 thei
Re: (Score:2)
It's not like having the libraries for both on your system is a huge space cost. And, quite frankly, no one does "just X" these days.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
Point, however, remember that for newbies and such, installing and configuring Arch or Debian is also out of the question. So, just provide a package for recent Ubuntu releases, and a tarball for "others" if you don't want to keep sets for other distros around and tested.
Re: (Score:2)
But why should these projects go out of their way to make life easier for proprietary software vendors? Why?
Despite the fact
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
You think that because Wayland is not networked that we're going to lose networked widgets, but that's not the case.
You see, for a long time X has become more and more client orientated. When 2D was getting replaced with compositing, the entire stream of new features actually made X.org more and more like Wayland.
Wayland is not realy what you probably think it is. Wayland is a Window Manager on top of OpenGL ES and other techniques like Gallium3D.
So where does the networking come from? Where it should have
Re: (Score:2)
Wayland is a Window Manager
So, what if I want to use my own window manager? I no longer get to use wayland apps? This is why the window manager and display server have been separate for so long. There's no reason to conflate the two now.
So where does the networking come from? Where it should have been in the first place: widget toolkits like GTK+ and Qt.
So every tool kit has to support networking itself, rather than just inheriting it from the display server? Why is that "where it should have been"? Ev
Re: (Score:2)
So, what if I want to use my own window manager? I no longer get to use wayland apps? This is why the window manager and display server have been separate for so long. There's no reason to conflate the two now.
Wayland is the compositor system. You write a wayland server in much the same way as you write a window manager, so they can be freely replaced. Apparently it takes about the same amount of code.
Which makes the claim that it is a better, simpler system rather curious.
Oh also, all the demos so far have
Re: (Score:2)
You think that because Wayland is not networked that we're going to lose networked widgets, but that's not the case.
It's a definite risk. However, there are many more things wrong with Wayland than just that.
You see, for a long time X has become more and more client orientated. When 2D was getting replaced with compositing, the entire stream of new features actually made X.org more and more like Wayland.
Yes: and that's not a good thing. I think personally that the new extensions are mis-designed. It would h
Re: (Score:2)
User base [kde.org]. It's a wiki... if there is something missing, and you find out how to do it, add it.