On the road to KDE 4.1

dhave · 2008-07-28 23:00:00

The clever KDEmod folks are planning to maintain separate strands for KDEmod 4.x and KDEmod 3.5x. That would be a good solution for people who really want to stick with 3.5.

(Was this mentioned above? i didn't see it, if so.)

damjan · 2008-07-28 23:45:10

Pierre wrote:

First of all: The move seems quite fast for "outsieders" but it was well planned and for a long time.

I guess there's a thing to learn from this ... big changes as this one really need to be communicated better.. and I don't mean just published in a news letter but also listening about what people have to say.

Pierre wrote:

It was known for very long that KDE 4 will replace version 3. Noone ever complained about this before. (one KDE 4 slogan is '"Don't look back!")

I complained about this same issue when the Qt package replaced qt3 with qt4. The thing is, the difference between qt and qt4, and also between KDE3 and KDE4 is like between KDE and Gnome, or vim and emacs. And you don't make those packages replace each other. They are completelly different platforms. I think there was NO need at all to *replace* the packages.

Mind you, I have nothing against KDE4 or your packages... But I'm not ready to switch to KDE4 and so are other people. This forced change was completelly unnecesseary and disastrous.

But maybe in the long term.. Arch should use separate repositories for big projects like this?

A separate Gnome, KDE3, KDE4 repos?

kensai · 2008-07-28 23:58:13

I'm actually getting tired of people treating Pierre like he did such a bad thing. Whiners should not talk like this to developers. This has been discussed in the public developers mailing list for some time now. And yeah, that list is public for a reason, so people know what are we up to when we are upgrading/changing packages between other things. We skipped a whole kde4 release, and that was the intelligent thing to do, given the problems kde 4.0 had usability and stability wise. Now, it has been known to the whole Linux community that kde version 4.1 was going to be the one replacing kde3, kde developers even felt it was meant to be that way. And we know all major upgrades does not go as smooth as one would like but well, we have to make the move. Arch Linux is a bleeding edge distribution, and all our users know that, and agree with that when they download and install our distribution.

Now, Pierre I want to tell you, is an awesome job you did on this kde4 packaging. For the first time I am using a kde4 desktop so stable it has replaced gnome on my system. Thanks and keep up the good work.

PS: People think is easy to maintain two versions of a desktop environment, they think wasting bandwidth is another cool thing. It is funny when people speak of that of which they don't know.

Shaika-Dzari · 2008-07-29 00:20:28

Just want to say thank you Pierre.
The updated was smooth and without any problem.
Great job

ozar · 2008-07-29 00:49:47

kensai wrote:

This has been discussed in the public developers mailing list for some time now.

Yep, it has been discussed there and here on the forums for more than 7 months now that I know of. It was definitely time for the 4.x series to replace the 3.x series, in my opinion.

Either way, anyone that doesn't want to move to KDE 4.1 should probably say "no" to the question asked by pacman when you do a system upgrade.

staple · 2008-07-29 01:03:16

it's awesome thanks!

cbart387 · 2008-07-29 01:46:42

It was very smooth, however the only notice I saw was the one about it being in testing. First I thought that maybe someone had goofed and put them in the wrong repos. Then I thought that I had set up my mirrors wrong and had enabled testing (this coming from someone who installed Arch within the last week). The execution of it was flawless from my point-of-view.

My suggestion would be to add a page on the website that lists major enhancements that are expected within the 'near' future. There may have been a lot of discussion and such about the moving, but as a user who just installed Arch on Friday I had no clue. Also, having an expected list would make it convenient for users to know what is going on. Note that I'm not trying to criticize anyone, it was done pulled off quite. But just because it was done well doesn't mean we can't look on how it can be improved. And if there's anything that I can help with let me know. I don't have the time available for coding but I could certainly help with the website and wiki if there's a need.

chilebiker · 2008-07-29 03:07:17

Shaika-Dzari wrote:

Just want to say thank you Pierre.
The updated was smooth and without any problem.
Great job

Same here! And I do like Dolphin!

dolby · 2008-07-29 04:59:01

I remember people BEGGING tpowa to provide KDE 4 when it was first announced.
Half year later the same people say the inclusion of KDE 4 was not what they wanted, it happened too fast & they wanna stay with the older version.
LOL

shining · 2008-07-29 05:37:37

dolby wrote:

I remember people BEGGING tpowa to provide KDE 4 when it was first announced.
Half year later the same people say the inclusion of KDE 4 was not what they wanted, it happened too fast & they wanna stay with the older version.
LOL

I really hope they are not the same people

shining · 2008-07-29 05:47:07

cbart387 wrote:

It was very smooth, however the only notice I saw was the one about it being in testing. First I thought that maybe someone had goofed and put them in the wrong repos. Then I thought that I had set up my mirrors wrong and had enabled testing (this coming from someone who installed Arch within the last week). The execution of it was flawless from my point-of-view.
My suggestion would be to add a page on the website that lists major enhancements that are expected within the 'near' future. There may have been a lot of discussion and such about the moving, but as a user who just installed Arch on Friday I had no clue. Also, having an expected list would make it convenient for users to know what is going on. Note that I'm not trying to criticize anyone, it was done pulled off quite. But just because it was done well doesn't mean we can't look on how it can be improved. And if there's anything that I can help with let me know. I don't have the time available for coding but I could certainly help with the website and wiki if there's a need.

I disagree with all the whining, but this comment is more constructive.
Even though I wasn't affected in any ways by this move, I also think the communication could have been better. Probably just some kind of pre-announcement done earlier on the News section or Announcements forums would have been enough. But well, I know it is hard to concentrate on both the development and/or packaging, and communication with users; we had the same problem with pacman.

aardwolf · 2008-07-29 08:26:56

Hey, thanks for releasing it early for Archlinux! I haven't updated yet but will make the evening free to do the update and resolve all issues if any would pop up.

ornitorrincos · 2008-07-29 08:57:36

shining wrote:

Even though I wasn't affected in any ways by this move, I also think the communication could have been better. Probably just some kind of pre-announcement done earlier on the News section or Announcements forums would have been enough. But well, I know it is hard to concentrate on both the development and/or packaging, and communication with users; we had the same problem with pacman.

actually, I think that everybody really interested in the testing repo reads the public developer mailing list, or at least they should

shining · 2008-07-29 09:24:21

ornitorrincos wrote:

shining wrote:
Even though I wasn't affected in any ways by this move, I also think the communication could have been better. Probably just some kind of pre-announcement done earlier on the News section or Announcements forums would have been enough. But well, I know it is hard to concentrate on both the development and/or packaging, and communication with users; we had the same problem with pacman.
actually, I think that everybody really interested in the testing repo reads the public developer mailing list, or at least they should

I think the same, and have been saying that myself many times.

What cbart387 was proposing is just averting the normal users (which use extra, not testing) more in advance. I don't know, maybe that would let more time for the users to prepare psychologically to that change or whatever, and that could reduce the whining a bit.
Anyway, it's not a big deal, and I personally don't care.

MONODA · 2008-07-29 10:46:12

is there any chance that we will see 3.5.10 in the arch repos? I really prefer the 3.5 series to kde 4 and 4.1
EDIT: http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-release-tea … 717503&w=2

Last edited by MONODA (2008-07-29 10:57:55)

neowolf · 2008-07-29 12:42:31

MONODA wrote:

is there any chance that we will see 3.5.10 in the arch repos? I really prefer the 3.5 series to kde 4 and 4.1
EDIT: http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-release-tea … 717503&w=2

Seems unlikely, again it seems like asking a lot when it comes to asking for two different DEs to be actively maintained by the same people. However again, the KDEmod team is planning to keep a KDE3.x repository around.

MONODA · 2008-07-29 12:50:42

yeah I was thinking the same thing, I am really too afraid to upgrade to 4.1, everything is working perfectly (it NEVER has on this laptop) and I dont want to lose stability, performance or any of my configs. Also, I have tried 4.1 before in openSUSE and it is really too slow for me (3.5 worked much faster on that same installation)

anykey · 2008-07-29 12:59:52

I am glad KDE4 is finally somehow distributed to a more widespread base of people. There's still things to fix, but hey people, THINK. They need to distribute it, or it will never be fixed.

And so far, it is really great and Pierre is my new personal hero for daring that move. Use it, file bugs, get it fixed, and be happy we got it before 2010. Thanks Pierre!

The two things bugging me the most are that I cannot make the panel span over both my screens at 3360x1050, minor graphics glitches, and that I have to start konqueror from a terminal [fixed by deleting a script exporting KDEDIRS and KDEHOME from what, two years ago]. I also have disabled nepomuk/strigi because I had bad experience with them in the past.

Last edited by anykey (2008-07-29 13:24:47)

MONODA · 2008-07-29 13:07:23

i am not saying that they shouldnt have distributed kde 4 I am just saying thatit would be a lot better if kde 4 wasnt treated as an update to kde 3.5 but as a totally new package which conflicts with 3.5. The reason for this is because I am happy with 3.5 and I am waiting for 3.5.10 (I dont plan on upgrading to 4 untill around 4.2, maybe longer, maybe never since I really dont see the need to)

anykey · 2008-07-29 13:25:45

yeah, and how many people would then just choose to stick with 3.5 for all eternity, which is clearly not wanted by kde.org?

kde4 is the successor of kde3. There's just no way denying this fact. The folks over at kde.org have not developed kde4 for fun alone. Of course they want to cease maintenance for 3.5 at some point -- which is completely understandable.

Last edited by anykey (2008-07-29 13:28:30)

MONODA · 2008-07-29 13:39:23

well i didnt say that the 3.5 packages should be mantained forever, I ment that I specifically might stay with them for a long time. I would just like it if 3.5 was supported untill a little after 3.5.10 and those who wish to upgrade to 4 can do so. this would work if 3.5 and 4 were diffferent packages.

mancino · 2008-07-29 13:57:32

maybe kde4 is better, but it's not good the time to move in extra without any good "howto" like it was for other changes
in package.
pay attention developers!!!!
you can destroy best distro!!!

Bestiapeluda · 2008-07-29 14:14:16

Thx for 4.1 works great !!

And thx KDEMod team for mantaining KDE 3.5

Anders · 2008-07-29 15:27:02

Installed KDE 4, works great, much better than I had expected

damjan · 2008-07-29 15:35:25

dolby wrote:

I remember people BEGGING tpowa to provide KDE 4 when it was first announced.
Half year later the same people say the inclusion of KDE 4 was not what they wanted, it happened too fast & they wanna stay with the older version.
LOL

Why do you twist the truth?

Nobody is saying anything against KDE4.. the issue is the removal of KDE3, and making it almost imposible to keep it.

Arch Linux

#76 2008-07-28 23:00:00

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#77 2008-07-28 23:45:10

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#78 2008-07-28 23:58:13

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#79 2008-07-29 00:20:28

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#80 2008-07-29 00:49:47

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#81 2008-07-29 01:03:16

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#82 2008-07-29 01:46:42

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#83 2008-07-29 03:07:17

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#84 2008-07-29 04:59:01

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#85 2008-07-29 05:37:37

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#86 2008-07-29 05:47:07

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#87 2008-07-29 08:26:56

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#88 2008-07-29 08:57:36

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#89 2008-07-29 09:24:21

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#90 2008-07-29 10:46:12

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#91 2008-07-29 12:42:31

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#92 2008-07-29 12:50:42

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#93 2008-07-29 12:59:52

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#94 2008-07-29 13:07:23

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#95 2008-07-29 13:25:45

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#96 2008-07-29 13:39:23

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#97 2008-07-29 13:57:32

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#98 2008-07-29 14:14:16

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#99 2008-07-29 15:27:02

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

#100 2008-07-29 15:35:25

Re: On the road to KDE 4.1

Board footer