KDE4 in [current] (When?)

sula · 2008-01-11 20:40:51

Why will kde4 not co-exist with kde3 in arch repos? I was thinking that this is how "kde's" will be menaged in arch. Waiting for kde4 to have the same usability and productivity like kde3 can take even whole 1 year or more

Bestiapeluda · 2008-01-11 21:29:10

sula wrote:

Why will kde4 not co-exist with kde3 in arch repos? I was thinking that this is how "kde's" will be menaged in arch. Waiting for kde4 to have the same usability and productivity like kde3 can take even whole 1 year or more

/agree

xfce and xfce-svn coexist too, and without problems i might add.

moustic · 2008-01-11 21:36:51

Where are you mister KDE4.0 ? In other distro ? Kubuntu !

Last edited by moustic (2008-01-11 21:39:46)

LTSmash · 2008-01-11 22:02:34

I tested KDE4.0 RC2 and it's useable, however I believe it's unfinished...

I will stick with KDE 3.5.x for the meantime, however I would like to test more deeply KDE4, so it should really be on the repos (and yes, I do use the [Testing] Repo...)

Allan · 2008-01-11 23:23:57

Bestiapeluda wrote:

sula wrote:
Why will kde4 not co-exist with kde3 in arch repos? I was thinking that this is how "kde's" will be menaged in arch. Waiting for kde4 to have the same usability and productivity like kde3 can take even whole 1 year or more
/agree
xfce and xfce-svn coexist too, and without problems i might add.

xfce-svn is in community so is maintained by a TU not the main developers. The developers have already stated that they a leaving KDE4 alone until at least 4.1 but I suppose if a TU want to maintain it they could. I highly doubt anyone wants to take all the bug report that would be generated when what is basically a developmental preview hits the repos so it is very likely this will never happen...

P@trick · 2008-01-12 00:18:44

The question is: KDE4 in [testing], when? Are there planes to make an avaible download for it, or will the arch team wait till 4.1?

lucke · 2008-01-12 02:12:03

Just use kdemod's repo. It doesn't need to be in an official repo for you to be able to enjoy it.

Valheru · 2008-01-12 02:44:58

Gullible Jones wrote:

... What strange psychoactive drugs are the KDE devs on? Seriously, why call it 4.0 if it is actually a beta? Why not call it 4.0b1 like everyone else?

To put it simply, KDE4 isn't for you pussies - it's meant for us 1337 developers so that we have a semi-functional desktop environment to test our applications in. The rest of you babies can wait for 4.1 before you start using it on a daily, basis - in the meanwhile, us God-like cretins have a playground all to ourselves to port our shit to the almighty Qt 4.x.

Last edited by Valheru (2008-01-12 02:45:12)

lilsirecho · 2008-01-12 04:48:53

Read a report that kubuntu will not have kde4.

djclue917 · 2008-01-12 06:59:23

lilsirecho wrote:

Read a report that kubuntu will not have kde4.

http://kubuntu.org/announcements/kde-4.0.php

Tido · 2008-01-12 08:40:04

Gullible Jones wrote:

... What strange psychoactive drugs are the KDE devs on? Seriously, why call it 4.0 if it is actually a beta? Why not call it 4.0b1 like everyone else?

Release Early. Release Often.

Sounds crazy, but it works.

http://aseigo.blogspot.com/2008/01/talking-bluntly.html

sweiss · 2008-01-12 10:59:18

KDE 4.0 was released because it needs to be released.
I prefer that to the E17 release policy, I somehow believe we will even have KDE 4.1 before E17.

And still, why release it if it's in bad shape?
Consider all of the KDE-based distros. Surely you cannot expect them to include beta software as their official desktop. Since KDE 4.0 is considered stable, they can adopt it into their distro, and by doing so, they will probably have to fix some major bugs to get it ready for production. So now we have more work force on bugs, they are sending fixes upstream, and everyone benefits.

Just one scenario of the top of my head.

Last edited by sweiss (2008-01-12 11:00:02)

kishd · 2008-01-12 11:08:16

I just installed kdemod4. It seems quite stable. My initial impression is that it is much more stable than the beta/rc versions. I think that as more people use kde4 it will appear as an option in Archlinux long before it does in many of the other distro's. Perhaps a full version could be released in unstable and later moved to testing.

sula · 2008-01-12 11:11:44

lucke wrote:

Just use kdemod's repo. It doesn't need to be in an official repo for you to be able to enjoy it.

As have been stated on other thread. No 64 bit in kdemod...

miggols99 · 2008-01-12 11:39:24

Here's the repo for KDE4 64bit.

[tanis]
Server = http://jakub.markconstable.com/x86_64

Put that into your pacman.conf.

May-C · 2008-01-12 12:03:36

@miggols
The tanis repo works quite well. Only problem is that it uses the same home like kde3...
You need another user for kde4 in this case. However are the PKGBUILDS available for kdemod-kde4. With a few modifications it is possible to build it on x86_64.

Ferhiord · 2008-01-13 08:19:37

miggols99 wrote:

Here's the repo for KDE4 64bit.
[tanis]
Server = http://jakub.markconstable.com/x86_64
Put that into your pacman.conf.

mmm that's good, but i have x86 arch, where can i find the latest packages? (there are old packages on [tardo])

Last edited by Ferhiord (2008-01-13 08:23:30)

evdvelde · 2008-01-14 11:01:54

With many other distributions providing KDE 4 packages, it would seem strange that Arch is not willing to provide these packages. If you think they are unstable, well... put them there (in unstable repo) and make sure they can run alongside KDE 3. All more experienced users have run and /or still run unstable/svn/cvs software on there computers since sometimes you just need it. e.g. I still have to use the madwifi-svn drivers on my macbook pro.
I just mean to say that not completely stable is not necessarily bad (KDE 3.5.8 apps still crash sometimes too ), sometimes new features and such outweigh a bit of instability.
Furthermore, for me Arch is a means for use Linux easily in a way I like, with the packages I like. Since KDE4 and KDE3 apps can be run alongside eachother even from within the KDE4 environment, I think Arch should offer the possibility to try it.
kdemod repositories are nice, but in my opinion the official repositories should provide this too as well.

miggols99 · 2008-01-14 16:35:10

evdvelde wrote:

With many other distributions providing KDE 4 packages, it would seem strange that Arch is not willing to provide these packages. If you think they are unstable, well... put them there (in unstable repo) and make sure they can run alongside KDE 3. All more experienced users have run and /or still run unstable/svn/cvs software on there computers since sometimes you just need it. e.g. I still have to use the madwifi-svn drivers on my macbook pro.
I just mean to say that not completely stable is not necessarily bad (KDE 3.5.8 apps still crash sometimes too ), sometimes new features and such outweigh a bit of instability.
Furthermore, for me Arch is a means for use Linux easily in a way I like, with the packages I like. Since KDE4 and KDE3 apps can be run alongside eachother even from within the KDE4 environment, I think Arch should offer the possibility to try it.
kdemod repositories are nice, but in my opinion the official repositories should provide this too as well.

I totally agree with this. I would prefer an official repo and different languages because it bugs me when I see Colors instead of Colours...

Cerebral · 2008-01-14 16:40:41

evdvelde wrote:

With many other distributions providing KDE 4 packages, it would seem strange that Arch is not willing to provide these packages.

With so many other distributions jumping off a bridge...

evdvelde · 2008-01-14 16:52:36

Cerebral wrote:

With so many other distributions jumping off a bridge...

This is far too negative... And all I want is the choice... if it really fails me badly, I will return to 3.5, but most of the stuff I have read is far from as bad as you make it look like.
It is even possible to use some of the 3.5 apps in 4.0... so what is the problem really?

ProzacR · 2008-01-14 17:53:06

Ppl here used KDE 3.5 (not me) for quite long time and they do not want any other de.
As openbox and gtk user I do not care about KDE at all.

And who wants bleeding edge KDe so go to dl Mandriva Linux 2008.1

Cerebral · 2008-01-14 18:03:16

evdvelde wrote:

Cerebral wrote:
With so many other distributions jumping off a bridge...
This is far too negative...

Maybe I do sound negative, but it's just a saying - have you not heard it before? My mother said it to me all the time..
"But Mom, all the other kids are allowed to skateboard!"
"If all the other kids were jumping off a bridge, would you do it too?"

evdvelde wrote:

And all I want is the choice... if it really fails me badly, I will return to 3.5, but most of the stuff I have read is far from as bad as you make it look like.
It is even possible to use some of the 3.5 apps in 4.0... so what is the problem really?

The problem is that you want us to do all the work to give you that choice. If you want it, KDEMod has it for i686, I've heard there's another repo for x86_64 (though I can't remember where) - there's your choice right there, what's wrong with it?

Our KDE maintainer has said he won't be packaging KDE 4.0 for Arch's main repos, for a number of reasons. I haven't heard any compelling arguments from the other side - only "Other distros are doing it" and "I want it, so package it for me." Sorry, but that won't be enough to change anyone's mind.

freakcode · 2008-01-14 18:20:33

On the purpose to add to the topic. From ArchWiki (http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/The_Arch_Way):

User-centric
Whereas many Linux distributions attempt to be more 'user-friendly', Arch Linux has always been, and will always remain 'user-centric'.
Arch Linux makes the user the center of the system by giving them full, and only full, control over the system.
Arch Linux users fully manage the system on their own. The system itself will offer little assistance, except for a simple set of maintenance tools that are designed to perfectly relay the user's commands to the system.
The user-centric design also implies a certain "do it yourself" approach. Rather than requesting a new feature be implemented by developers, Arch Linux users have a tendency to solve problems themselves and share the results with the community and development team. This is especially true for user-contributed packages found in the Arch User Repository -- the official Arch Linux repository for community-maintained packages.

On my vision, the KDE maintainer is right on willing to have a working KDE 3.5 than a less than perfect KDE 4. Also, I'm certainly sure that is a LOT more of work to maintain both KDE 3.5 and KDE 4, much more than to maintain, e.g., the mentioned xfce and xfce-svn. So, when KDE 4 is pretty stable and the community (you, me, and hopefully others) acquired the know-how of building it and fixing all the surfacing issues, then, and just then, will make sense to have it on official.

BrigadierFRog · 2008-01-14 20:17:38

The reason should be simple enough. Its nice to have a stable api to develop with. And I'd much rather have the distro handle building and packaging then to attempt that all on my own. As a developer, it'd be very nice to at least have the option to use KDE 4 and develop with it. I don't really understand why kde3 and kde4 can't coexist in the repos at this time. Fluxbox had two entries, XFCE had two entries, E has two entries. Seriously. I don't mind building it from svn all the time, but it'd be nice to not have to. It'd be nice to be able to use it as well to report bugs etc etc.

Again, why can't kde3 and kde4 coexist much like other wm's and de's have in arch before? Its not like it hasn't been done...

Arch Linux

#26 2008-01-11 20:40:51

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#27 2008-01-11 21:29:10

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#28 2008-01-11 21:36:51

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#29 2008-01-11 22:02:34

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#30 2008-01-11 23:23:57

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#31 2008-01-12 00:18:44

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#32 2008-01-12 02:12:03

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#33 2008-01-12 02:44:58

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#34 2008-01-12 04:48:53

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#35 2008-01-12 06:59:23

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#36 2008-01-12 08:40:04

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#37 2008-01-12 10:59:18

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#38 2008-01-12 11:08:16

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#39 2008-01-12 11:11:44

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#40 2008-01-12 11:39:24

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#41 2008-01-12 12:03:36

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#42 2008-01-13 08:19:37

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#43 2008-01-14 11:01:54

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#44 2008-01-14 16:35:10

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#45 2008-01-14 16:40:41

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#46 2008-01-14 16:52:36

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#47 2008-01-14 17:53:06

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#48 2008-01-14 18:03:16

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#49 2008-01-14 18:20:33

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

#50 2008-01-14 20:17:38

Re: KDE4 in [current] (When?)

Board footer