[Oxygen]

Originally Posted by ozar

From what I understand, the KDE folks plan to totally drop it as soon as KDE4 is capable of replacing it, so if nobody takes on the task of forking it, I guess it's dead in the water.

I think the definition of KDE 4 being capable may differ for them.

[dalinux_n00bie]

i personally don't think we can completely make a judgment call till KDE 4.1 comes out. In my mind, KDE 4 is still a beta.

[fingal]

Originally Posted by dalinux_n00bie

i personally don't think we can completely make a judgment call till KDE 4.1 comes out. In my mind, KDE 4 is still a beta.

That's right... It must be very frustrating to put all this work in, only to receive criticism from users. I think that we should wait for the end result before saying too much. If KDE 4.1 is a disappointment, I'll stick with my existing version - 3.5 - for as long as I can.

[techieMoe]

Originally Posted by fingal

That's right... It must be very frustrating to put all this work in, only to receive criticism from users. I think that we should wait for the end result before saying too much. If KDE 4.1 is a disappointment, I'll stick with my existing version - 3.5 - for as long as I can.

Not to say I'm unsympathetic to the KDE developers (since I'm a devoloper myself) but it was their own fault. If they weren't ready for criticism, they should have just waited and released KDE 4.0 later on, at what now will be the KDE 4.1 release date.

Once you let the genie out of the bottle, you have to batten down the hatches and prepare for the storm. And yes, I know I mixed metaphors there.

[techieMoe]

Here's another side to the story. I don't agree with the author when he speaks of "innovation." All I see is change for the sake of change, which is never a good thing. I do however, agree with this statement:

Although KDE 4.1 is gearing up to deliver a very strong user experience, the negative impression left by the clumsy 4.0 release will turn off a lot of users... and prevent them from giving 4.1 a fair chance.

We've said this before. A bad first impression is hard to recover from.

[masinick]

Originally Posted by ozar

From what I understand, the KDE folks plan to totally drop it as soon as KDE4 is capable of replacing it, so if nobody takes on the task of forking it, I guess it's dead in the water.

When the Mozilla project decided to head the direction of individual, stand alone applications for Web browsing, Email, and calendar management, some people were enthusiastic because of the promises of an easier to extend interface. No doubt, the projects have had some success, especially the Firefox project. But when a group of people decided to carry on the legacy code in the original Mozilla Suite, Mozilla graciously offered to cooperate and even help, by hosting the servers containing the software and the Web presence for announcements, releases, etc. This meant that the code that some people loved was not lost. The result was the very stable Seamonkey project. The very first Seamonkey release made it evident that with a small team having a clear focus, the work could carry on without impeding the Firefox or Thunderbird efforts.

If the howling persists, perhaps the KDE organization would be willing to continue to host the source code to the 3.5.* branch of code and another team that wants to own it and maintain it could take it on and do what they want with it. If the KDE organization does not want to do that, there is nothing - at least right now, that prevents someone from grabbing all of the current source code and doing with it whatever they want, since it is licensed under the GPL. Then KDE can go whichever direction they want, and people preferring the status quo can go whichever direction they want too.

It is unfortunate if there is no other way to keep everyone happy. Let's face it, there are lots of desktop and window managers already. What's wrong with another choice?

[techieMoe]

Originally Posted by masinick

It is unfortunate if there is no other way to keep everyone happy. Let's face it, there are lots of desktop and window managers already. What's wrong with another choice?

Except KDE 4 isn't a choice. It's the officially blessed, use-it-because-we-say-so version of KDE from here on out. We're not talking about a parallel side project here. KDE 4 is the future of the KDE project according to the current developers, and those who don't like it are stuck finding something else.

[masinick]

Originally Posted by techieMoe

Except KDE 4 isn't a choice. It's the officially blessed, use-it-because-we-say-so version of KDE from here on out. We're not talking about a parallel side project here. KDE 4 is the future of the KDE project according to the current developers, and those who don't like it are stuck finding something else.

My friend, I understand what you are getting at, but I would have to counter that KDE - any version - is a choice, just as GNOME is a choice, XFCE is a choice, and fvwm is also a choice.

What I believe you are suggesting is that without a fork, in the future KDE 4 will be the only choice actively supported by KDE, and to this I agree.

If anyone is really all that passionate about this, I would suggest forking sooner rather than later. You can always drop it if you change your mind, but once those sources are not as easily accessed it could be more of a problem (though never insurmountable) to get them.

Upset people: organize and fork now. KDE 3.5.9 is certainly solid enough. But let me tell you, these guys did some great work and it is a LOT of effort. If this stuff ever forks, I would be glad to be a tester, but my development days are essentially over. Too many other challenges to meet.

[daark.child]

This thread and the SJVN article remind me of the transition from GNOME 1.4 to 2.x. I remember people calling for forks (I think some developers started one which ultimately did not get anywhere apart from a few patches) and saying what a poor job the GNOME developers had done on GNOME 2.x. Several point releases later some of those people speak of GNOME as if its the best thing since sliced bread. The truth is that a major shift in any software project is likely to cause problems and face antagonism from certain quarters. I commend the KDE devs for taking a bold step and starting basically from scratch. The product is not finished and neither is it flawless, but I am quite happy to wait and let them do their job. If one is not happy to migrate to KDE4, then they can use KDE 3.5.x which is still being supported by the KDE devs.

[masinick]

Originally Posted by daark.child

This thread and the SJVN article remind me of the transition from GNOME 1.4 to 2.x. I remember people calling for forks (I think some developers started one which ultimately did not get anywhere apart from a few patches) and saying what a poor job the GNOME developers had done on GNOME 2.x. Several point releases later some of those people speak of GNOME as if its the best thing since sliced bread. The truth is that a major shift in any software project is likely to cause problems and face antagonism from certain quarters. I commend the KDE devs for taking a bold step and starting basically from scratch. The product is not finished and neither is it flawless, but I am quite happy to wait and let them do their job. If one is not happy to migrate to KDE4, then they can use KDE 3.5.x which is still being supported by the KDE devs.

I would agree with you on GNOME. In the 1.X days, every point release seemed to be quite a bit different and they did not seem to have a clear roadmap on where they were going. I would try it and it would get the basic job done but it really did not interest me much at all, GNU project or not.

When GNOME 2.0 came out, it may have been erratic at first, but Novell (and SUSE, their product) started using it in their Enterprise lineup, GNOME started to really take on form. In the SLED (SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop) I saw one of the cleanest desktop environments built up to that time. The Ubuntu project further strengthened that. Combined with the fact that several corporations got behind the GNOME effort, it really improved a great deal. Now, though it is not my preference, it is a really solid and mature desktop that needs no apologies.

There is little doubt in my mind that KDE 4 will also mature into a desktop that many will grow to appreciate and use. One camp is really excited about it already. What we are hearing in much of this discussion is the disappointment that many others are having because the interface they have grown used to is being changed.

Let me mention another use case, the development of XFCE, a lighter and less popular desktop that nevertheless has a growing base of users and interest. XFCE 3 was an extremely fast desktop environment. It was simple and easy to customize, but it had limits in terms of where it could grow. The developers chose to move it to a Gtk+ code base. It looked real promising, but it also had a few versions of struggles. At one point I had to virtually stop using it, which disappointed me, because I could not rely on it to perform simple every day tasks.

Today, XFCE 4 is past version 4.4.2 and it is an extremely stable, fast, and usable desktop environment and it is probably the fhird or fourth most popular desktop, and is often included as a desktop choice, especially on systems that try to conserve memory and footprint resources.

KDE 4 is undoubtedly going to follow the path we have seen with GNOME and XFCE. The question for those who are uncomfortable is whether they are going to move to GNOME, XFCE, or something else, stick with KDE and follow KDE 4 as it becomes the KDE default, or will some group of developers have sufficient energy to maintain, and thus fork, the existing KDE 3.5.9 code base?

XFCE is even a sizable project. There are probably in the neighborhood of twenty developers. KDE is orders of magnitude larger. They would need more than twenty people just to maintain the current code base from security flaws and rebuilds against newer system libraries and things of that nature. To evolve it in any way would take considerably more effort. Just maintaining what is there would be a sizable undertaking. I give that less than a ten percent chance of happening, and even that is being generous. If people are that upset they are going to have to put their energies into it and channel that frustration in a useful way. i do not think that will actually happen.

It could take another year or more before KDE 4 really starts growing on people, all applications are completely ported and debugged, and it could be longer than that before people settle into it, However, not everyone is bothered. Many are excited about what KDE 4 can do today and they see the possibilities ahead. Some really like the latest beta of KDE 4.1. I have not had a chance to try it to form an opinion.

As far as KDE 4.0.3 or KDE 4.0.4 go, I found them to be usable and routine desktop tasks seemed to work fine. I was not used to the new style of the KDE Start Menu. It looks a lot like the default GNOME start. Without customization, taken as is, I am not very impressed with it. To me, it takes an already busy menu and makes stuff that is a couple of levels deep more challenging to find. I have to figure out how to use that interface productively. For me, I tend to add entries on the task bar and sometimes the desktop for items that I am most likely to use. I will find ways to do that which suit my computing style. Then as long as KDE is stable enough to work most of the time as designed and the applications come along, it will probably be fine for me. I have a "let's wait and see" attitude on that, and I periodically try snapshots of the current effort.