You are not logged in.

#1 2009-07-28 11:44:58

BlueFightingCat
Member
From: Helsinki
Registered: 2007-12-22
Posts: 72

KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

Hi,

Ok first a newbie question. Have I understood correctly when I say that KDEmod is essentially a "modularized" version of KDE? If so what does "modularization" mean exactly? Does it mean that instead of installing everything KDE has to offer I can chose to keep things small and only add the "modules" I want and need?

Secondly I've heard that KDE 4.3 is going to be modularized. Is this correct? Won't this make KDEmod slightly redundant (except for tweeking for chakra live-cd)? Once KDE 4.3 is released should I remove KDEmod and just install KDE? Or should I just upgrade my current KDEmod?

BFC

Offline

#2 2009-07-28 12:04:12

wonder
Developer
From: Bucharest, Romania
Registered: 2006-07-05
Posts: 5,937
Website

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

imo kde 4.3 from kde-unstable once moved into extra will make kdemod deprecated. is more modular than kdemod and is done right. you will not have any issue like where with libjpeg 7 because it will be recompiled on time.


Give what you have. To someone, it may be better than you dare to think.
Blog

Offline

#3 2009-07-28 12:05:29

Pyntux
Member
From: Serbia
Registered: 2008-12-21
Posts: 275

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

You can run kdemod or kde. I don`t now, but I think that kde 4.3 from extra repo (when come to extra) will be modular. You can try both and decide what is better for you...I`m using kdemod...

You can install kdemod-minimal, and you are gonna have only base kde, without juk player, ark, kmix and that kind a stuff, so you know now what means modular. On Kubuntu you got everything and if you install just (if is posible something like that) kde-multimedia, you got everything, kmix, juk even you don`t want something of that. For example in kdemod you can remove konqueror... wink

Last edited by Pyntux (2009-07-28 12:06:31)


I do not speak English, but I understand...

Offline

#4 2009-07-28 12:07:37

Pyntux
Member
From: Serbia
Registered: 2008-12-21
Posts: 275

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

wonder wrote:

imo kde 4.3 from kde-unstable once moved into extra will make kdemod deprecated. is more modular than kdemod and is done right. you will not have any issue like where with libjpeg 7 because it will be recompiled on time.

Can you explane "more modular than kdemod" ? I don`t have any issue with libjpeg7 on kdemod... wink


I do not speak English, but I understand...

Offline

#5 2009-07-28 12:16:34

gabriel9
Member
From: Banja Luka, RS
Registered: 2009-05-06
Posts: 79

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

I have used KDEmod for some time, and i had some difficulties and problems. Now i use KDE 4.3 RC3 from KDE unstable and it's much better then KDEmod, at least to me. I recommend KDE, but you should try and see what is good for you.

Pozdrav


"The flesh knows it suffers even when the mind has forgotten."

Offline

#6 2009-07-28 13:21:59

funkyou
Member
From: Berlin, DE
Registered: 2006-03-19
Posts: 848
Website

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

wonder wrote:

imo kde 4.3 from kde-unstable once moved into extra will make kdemod deprecated. is more modular than kdemod and is done right. you will not have any issue like where with libjpeg 7 because it will be recompiled on time.

Tell me what "done right" means, please. We have just another philosophy, and we dont see a reason to put every small lib into its own package, because it increases complexity and in terms of some packages (like kdeplasma-addons) its just unnessecary because you'll need most of these split packages anyway (all plasmoids need libs + dataengines and so forth, so why split them).

Deprecated you say? Well, give me a split Qt + a complete set of debugging packages + stable branch updates for KDE + our flexiblity (among many other things) and we'll see wink

Oh, and the libjpeg "issue" was solved very quickly.

Sorry, but you have no clue what you are talking about, and as a TU i consider this as unfriendly behaviour. But hey, we are already used to this, Arch just hast no consensus when it comes to community projects, which is the biggest flaw of this distro...


want a modular and tweaked KDE for arch? try kdemod

Offline

#7 2009-07-28 13:47:05

May-C
Member
Registered: 2007-12-28
Posts: 83

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

I was using kdemod for some time. The problem for me was that the 64-bit version was behind the 32-bit one. So I decided to change to the "normal" kde. Do not know how things are now...

Offline

#8 2009-07-28 14:10:49

Allan
Developer
From: Brisbane, AU
Registered: 2007-06-09
Posts: 10,416
Website

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

I could see this becoming the flame fest it is well on its way to becoming...  especially given this thread is already linked on the Chakra forums.  And there was at least one thread about this previous on their forums.

So here is my take on the issue.  I am in no way independent here, but given I have a dislike for all things Qt my opinions on Arch KDE versus KDEmod may be less biased.  I'm also the one who got split packaging into makepkg, using some ideas from the KDEmod guys and will likely be taking their separate debug package idea forward into a future pacman release.  I also maintain Shaman in [community].  That is basically me saying that I like what the Chakra guys have done.  Also, I know exactly what the libjpeg7 rebuild took to achieve given I took the lead in doing it.  The fact that KDEmod took a couple of days to catch up is perfectly understandable.  It was a lot of work and there has been no attempt at synchronisation that I know of, so this was always going to happen unless the KDEmod guys were sitting waiting for the move to happen.

Now onto the actual point here...

Arch is splitting the KDE packages up with the KDE-4.3 release.  This has previously only been available from KDEmod, so it is obvious that the KDEmod guys will see some "competition" here.  The reasons for Arch splitting the packages have been covered elsewhere.  To recap, the monolithic KDE builds were becoming very heavy with dependencies. Pierre had been complaining about this ever since Arch started distributing KDE-4.x packages and found package splitting the only way to deal with this.  optdepends were just not good enough here.  So it is definitely not being done just to make KDEmod deprecated.

So there is obviously some overlap between the groups.  Is there still a "need" for KDEmod.  Well, yes.  The Chakra guys need to customise their packages for their distro as they are aiming for something quite different than Arch. 

The question that needs asked is whether the KDEmod guys now need to maintain a whole KDE-4.x release or base it on the Arch packages some more.  We know they have much more experience in package splitting than the two Arch devs who maintain KDE.  As funkyou pointed out above, there may have been some unnecessary splitting that occurred and he has indicated elsewhere that the KDEmod guys have solved problems in the Arch packages.  So maybe more collaboration would be good here.

Also, it would be good to tell the Arch devs how we could help community project more.  I am sure we will be fairly open to suggestions (provided they do not hold up the main distro...).  e.g. I am committed to getting the new Shaman into the [community] repo the second pacman reaches [core].

Offline

#9 2009-07-28 14:45:01

alienman
Member
From: Mexico
Registered: 2008-07-08
Posts: 106

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

Hi guys, maybe is just my point of view, but I have used both kdemod and kde since kde 3.5 and what I can say is that making it modularized in fact could be seen as competition, but at the end the difference will be that Arch will stay with a vanilla kde meanwhile Chakra project guys will be able to modified and personalize anything they want to make it look unique as they did with kde 3.5

I hope these benefit both communities cool

And congratulations to both Allan and funkyou, both are doing great jobs in the Arch and kde communities, keep doing that well.


ISC - Ignacio Marmolejo
ArchLinux & GNOME User.

Offline

#10 2009-07-28 15:13:25

wonder
Developer
From: Bucharest, Romania
Registered: 2006-07-05
Posts: 5,937
Website

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

i didn't wanted to offend the project, is just that i'm more excited about kde-unstable than the kdemod. maybe because  i'm waited splitted kde from the time was announced on ml until now. this made me think about switching to kde and i didn't wanted to switch before because i don't like to mixed packages with unsupported repository. and libjpeg7 issues was a lot and if you search on bugtracker a lot of false reports was submited.

again. i'm sorry if i offend but this are my reason about the previous post.


Give what you have. To someone, it may be better than you dare to think.
Blog

Offline

#11 2009-07-28 16:37:26

scio
Member
From: Buffalo, NY
Registered: 2008-08-05
Posts: 366

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

My original reason for linking on the chakra boards was more for the "is more modular" part.  Which I thought might make life easier for bug reporting if chakra could use the majority of the standard KDE packages from arch.  This would help with people say "KDE is broked, fix me!" and they are really running kdemod.  I probably could have added more to my intent in the post, but I had a feeling anything that was said would cause more trouble than it was worth.

I tend to follow the less downstream patches the better mentality which is part of the reason I switched to arch.  This mentality was the motivation to my post, unifying the package builds, reducing downstream patches, warm fuzzy feelings for everyone.

Offline

#12 2009-07-28 17:03:06

funkyou
Member
From: Berlin, DE
Registered: 2006-03-19
Posts: 848
Website

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

Allan wrote:

I could see this becoming the flame fest it is well on its way to becoming...  especially given this thread is already linked on the Chakra forums.  And there was at least one thread about this previous on their forums.

I have just seen it. Depending on how this thread develops, i will close it.

And about the opinions in our forums: We also seem to have some missing consensus, every of of our devs has a different opinion about certain things, so we need some more clearance on this topic too.


Allan wrote:

Also, I know exactly what the libjpeg7 rebuild took to achieve given I took the lead in doing it.  The fact that KDEmod took a couple of days to catch up is perfectly understandable. It was a lot of work and there has been no attempt at synchronisation that I know of, so this was always going to happen unless the KDEmod guys were sitting waiting for the move to happen.

We always know whats going on in the Arch repos smile Its just that we are "normal people" and not some uber-devs, and sometimes we just have some time issues, like me currently changing my job and moving to another city and so forth. This is something users seem to forget from time to time. The only solution would be paying us, and i doubt that this would be sucessful smile All in all, whenever something like the libjpeg "situation" happens: Just calm down, drink a tea or something and wait for the update. Its not like that we are not keeping our stuff together.

Oh, and dont forget: Arch ist _the_ fastest distro out there when it comes to updates, sometimes its lightyears ahead of the "competition", so just enjoy the luxury and dont panic when its taking a bit more time sometimes smile


Allan wrote:

Arch is splitting the KDE packages up with the KDE-4.3 release. This has previously only been available from KDEmod, so it is obvious that the KDEmod guys will see some "competition" here.

Well, i dont see much competition here, because we have completely different goals. However, there are some things that shocked me a bit, but more down below.


Allan wrote:

So there is obviously some overlap between the groups.  Is there still a "need" for KDEmod. Well, yes. The Chakra guys need to customise their packages for their distro as they are aiming for something quite different than Arch.

Yes, thats the main reason. We just cannot provide the level of integration we want with the Arch packages, in our opinion a "desktop" LiveCD should feel like a desktop and we have very high standards regarding this integration. That starts with unofficial bugfixes for well-known KDE bugs and ends with our own patches for a "proper" default desktop, and of course our unofficial feature patches that we are doing for the fun of it.


Allan wrote:

The question that needs asked is whether the KDEmod guys now need to maintain a whole KDE-4.x release or base it on the Arch packages some more.  We know they have much more experience in package splitting than the two Arch devs who maintain KDE.  As funkyou pointed out above, there may have been some unnecessary splitting that occurred and he has indicated elsewhere that the KDEmod guys have solved problems in the Arch packages.

Another question is: Why got the split KDE packages in Arch built completely from scratch when there is already a project that does the same since a long time? Could have been easier by just asking us for some support or ideas. I guess i can port the Arch KDE PKGUILDs to our buildsystem (and the other way around) in less than 5 minutes, thats what i call doubled work.

Oh, and i know that i can be somewhat "in-your-face" from time to time, thats why people either love or hate me. But all in all, no one from our team bites, we are just a bunch of guys who love working on KDE, and we are always happy to help or answer questions.

Also, what really shocked me was the fact that, beside not asking us, maintainers of much smaller repos that were there for just some months were asked to "join efforts and work on one set of packages". I dont know how i should name that, ignorance or ego? smile (Just being open here, no flame intended).


Allan wrote:

So maybe more collaboration would be good here.

My dream: All major KDE repos on Arch work together, to solve problems etc while keeping their uniqueness. We have KDE in extra, we have Markc's daily builds and we have Chakra/KDEmod and so forth. And everyone can learn something from the other projects. Maybe something like an "Arch KDE strike force" could be an idea. Since i am using this distro, all others are just plain boring because Arch has the power smile and it just misses a bit of organization to be the perfect distro when it comes to the desktop. Maybe we can start that with a shared IRC channel, like #arch-KDE or something.


wonder wrote:

i didn't wanted to offend the project, is just that i'm more excited about kde-unstable than the kdemod. maybe because  i'm waited splitted kde from the time was announced on ml until now. this made me think about switching to kde and i didn't wanted to switch before because i don't like to mixed packages with unsupported repository. and libjpeg7 issues was a lot and if you search on bugtracker a lot of false reports was submited.
again. i'm sorry if i offend but this are my reason about the previous post.

No problem. But maybe you should change your mind a little bit, "external project" doesnt mean its completely unsupported. I dont know how people get this idea, especially when you consider for how long we are doing it now.


want a modular and tweaked KDE for arch? try kdemod

Offline

#13 2009-07-28 17:13:38

venky80
Member
Registered: 2007-05-13
Posts: 996

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

Allan wrote:

I could see this becoming the flame fest it is well on its way to becoming...  especially given this thread is already linked on the Chakra forums.  And there was at least one thread about this previous on their forums.

So here is my take on the issue.  I am in no way independent here, but given I have a dislike for all things Qt my opinions on Arch KDE versus KDEmod may be less biased.  I'm also the one who got split packaging into makepkg, using some ideas from the KDEmod guys and will likely be taking their separate debug package idea forward into a future pacman release.  I also maintain Shaman in [community].  That is basically me saying that I like what the Chakra guys have done.  Also, I know exactly what the libjpeg7 rebuild took to achieve given I took the lead in doing it.  The fact that KDEmod took a couple of days to catch up is perfectly understandable.  It was a lot of work and there has been no attempt at synchronisation that I know of, so this was always going to happen unless the KDEmod guys were sitting waiting for the move to happen.

Now onto the actual point here...

Arch is splitting the KDE packages up with the KDE-4.3 release.  This has previously only been available from KDEmod, so it is obvious that the KDEmod guys will see some "competition" here.  The reasons for Arch splitting the packages have been covered elsewhere.  To recap, the monolithic KDE builds were becoming very heavy with dependencies. Pierre had been complaining about this ever since Arch started distributing KDE-4.x packages and found package splitting the only way to deal with this.  optdepends were just not good enough here.  So it is definitely not being done just to make KDEmod deprecated.

So there is obviously some overlap between the groups.  Is there still a "need" for KDEmod.  Well, yes.  The Chakra guys need to customise their packages for their distro as they are aiming for something quite different than Arch. 

The question that needs asked is whether the KDEmod guys now need to maintain a whole KDE-4.x release or base it on the Arch packages some more.  We know they have much more experience in package splitting than the two Arch devs who maintain KDE.  As funkyou pointed out above, there may have been some unnecessary splitting that occurred and he has indicated elsewhere that the KDEmod guys have solved problems in the Arch packages.  So maybe more collaboration would be good here.

Also, it would be good to tell the Arch devs how we could help community project more.  I am sure we will be fairly open to suggestions (provided they do not hold up the main distro...).  e.g. I am committed to getting the new Shaman into the [community] repo the second pacman reaches [core].

Finally someone addressing from the perspective of arch Vs kdemod devs , yes collaboration is what is expected. If KDEMOD guys have more experienced then they should be consulted and maybe involved in maintaining arch KDE too. I think lack in collaboration and communication will be bad for both projects, if there is repetitive work being done then that could be sorted out with more communication.

Thanks


DELL XPS 1640 with ATI Mobility Radeon  HD 3670. Arch Linux KDE Minimal Install

Offline

#14 2009-07-28 17:25:22

Pierre
Developer
From: Bonn
Registered: 2004-07-05
Posts: 1,950
Website

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

Feel free to contact me or any other devs any time. I was always open to collaboration and bug reports and suggestions are always welcome, too. So, if you think I have done something bad or you think stuff could be improved just contact me. But you already know that; so I don't get it why you are so shocked.

Offline

#15 2009-07-28 20:39:05

scio
Member
From: Buffalo, NY
Registered: 2008-08-05
Posts: 366

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

funkyou wrote:

My dream: All major KDE repos on Arch work together, to solve problems etc while keeping their uniqueness.

This was the message I originally wanted to get across.  I should have just gone to IRC to talk about it, but I can't get there from work.  I'm just starting to play with PKGBUILDS and have a decent amount of experience with Qt, so I would be willing to help out with the "Arch KDE strike force" if one develops from this recurring mess I brought up.

Offline

#16 2009-07-28 20:53:13

funkyou
Member
From: Berlin, DE
Registered: 2006-03-19
Posts: 848
Website

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

Pierre wrote:

Feel free to contact me or any other devs any time. I was always open to collaboration and bug reports and suggestions are always welcome, too. So, if you think I have done something bad or you think stuff could be improved just contact me. But you already know that; so I don't get it why you are so shocked.

You are not getting the point. I wasnt shocked about technical stuff, but certain behaviour.

Collaboration actually means "doing stuff together or at least asking other people what they think about it", especially if they do the same thing, and not "reimplement something that already exists from scratch with some minor differences because what others did is not good enough" or "telling people that you are open for collaboration but not doing anything actively in this direction", like hey, lets reimplement Firefox because the order of the menu entries ist not "right" and we need to "fix" that. This is just the wrong way to deal with other people (="community") and what they are doing.

I hope you understand now why i was shocked and some of us even were pissed off a bit. And the fact that we werent asked (or asked the absolutely wrong questions that had nothing to do with this topic), but others got asked, underlines that. This is not what i (or anyone else) understands as "i am always open for collaboration". When you want to collaborate, you need to do it actively... Man, i even reported bugs in Arch's KDE in the past - never seen that from you or another Arch dev (you are just closing these bugs), so thats 1:0 for me/us. Lets see if we can improve that.

And as Allan said, we have more experience with this stuff and you could have avoided the unnessecary splitting of some packages for example (and maybe future mistakes) by just asking us and how we do it. And that would avoid a lot of work for everone (we need proper provides/replaces in our pkgs for example, and we dont want to modify them whenever you do such a mistake). And i guess i have seen all of your mistakes before, because we did them too. And if you are smart you can use that as an advantage, which also makes users more happy because they dont have to deal with those possible and unneeded mistakes.

I dont want to sound too rude, thats not my intention at all, i just want to elaborate our opinion and how we came to it. And the most important point: We are open for any collaboration and/or working together on certain things.

And because you asked about that, we cant use the KDE packages from extra because:

* we need some customizations for our liveCD
* we need debug packages for both Qt and KDE (we have some KDE devs in our team, and we need them for our tools too)
* out of experience, we have another philosophy when it comes to packaging and splitting, and our package layout is a lot simpler as in kde-unstable (and we see no reason to change that)
* we think its better to apply unofficial bugfixes for long-standing KDE bugs that are not resolved for years now than just ignoring them
* we like to add some flavour to "our" KDE that no one else has
* probably more, need to think about that smile



To end this, here is an example for what i mean with "missing consensus when it comes to community projects":

Arch Dev #1 says: "KDE 4.3 in extra will make KDEmod obsolete anyway"
Arch Dev #2 says: "No, we wont make KDEmod obsolete with this"
Arch Dev #3 says: "KDEmod will be deprecated when 4.3 is in extra"

These are just some statements i have seen, there are plenty of them, mostly negative (but not all of them)... And you guys are "wasting time by an increasing number of bogus bug reports for KDEmod"??? Just imagine us answering bogus questions because Arch Devs tell other people what i have outlined above... And this is not about bugs or doing 2 clicks in flyspray to close them, but behavior...

So, as said, i am open for collaboration and i believe that this will certainly improve everything™, and i will tell my teammates to do the same... If you guys have the same opinion and maybe find a consensus, this would be perfect.


want a modular and tweaked KDE for arch? try kdemod

Offline

#17 2009-07-29 01:21:08

Allan
Developer
From: Brisbane, AU
Registered: 2007-06-09
Posts: 10,416
Website

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

From the sounds of this, we could go around in circles for days...

From examining the Arch KDE-4.3 PKGBUILDs, I can see why Pierre made no contact about how to do this in the first place.  It looks like he just did a "find . -name Makefile" on each of the source tarballs he wanted to split and then adjusted the old KDE PKGBUILDs to suit.  The upstream KDE devs have made it really easy to do (and this is the main reason such splitting is accepted in Arch...).  And he had to handle an upgrade from the current Arch KDE packages, which is something I believe the KDEmod team do not do.   So my impression is, the actual direct porting to split packages would have taken about as long as porting from the KDEmod package style and removing un-Arch stuff.  Also note that most of the initial testing of the KDE package splitting needed to be done manually as this was a test of makepkg and Pierre did find a few interesting bugs in the split package implementation.

Anyway, moot point now.  That is in the past and there is not much that can be done.

My optimistic summary of the above posts:
kdemod) we have experience doing this and there are some improvements that could be made
arch dev) good, let us know what could be improved
kdemod) I'm still annoyed that you did not contact us in the first place but collaboration would be good.

So it appears we are getting somewhere...  and note that NOW is a good time to get potential packaging improvements into the Arch packages, before they hit the main repos.

Offline

#18 2009-07-29 07:33:57

attila
Member
Registered: 2006-11-14
Posts: 293

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

First i want to say that i'm to 100% sure that everybody (kde or kdemod) who is involved give all and i want to take the opportunity to say THANKS YOU VERY MUCH.

Okay, now to my basement: Because i'm still at kde3 i have to have my own packages which be based of kdemod3 without splitting and have now patches from all around the net. I have two VM's, one with archkde and one with kdemod, to see when will be the moment where i can do the step. So i'm not a profi but i think i know enough about KDE in archlinux to have an own opinion.

Now one, not so funny thing: You can think what you want about kdemod but is a fantastic work which is rather good than bad for archlinux. Therefore i propose to stop saying things as "will make KDEmod obsolete anyway" and "will be deprecated". This is not only a question of technique, this is a question of respect.

Okay, let us go to looking forward and one thing before i make my suggestion: If you take the time to look at the source RPMs from opensuse you will recognize that they, who have some of the KDE devs in their team, include a lot of patches which be from the category "unofficial bugfixes for long-standing KDE bugs" about what funkyou have spoken. I'm sure from my view that KDE will never be a software package which can be packaged without patches.

So if you want to have a point where you the KDE maintainer of both repos can start working togehter than open a communication channel of your choice and start sharing informations about patches which only improve the mainstream.

If there is someone who have the feeling of that i'm critizing or attacking than excuse me. My only goal is think positive and work together to avoid double work.

Offline

#19 2009-07-29 18:10:53

broch
Banned
From: L.A. California
Registered: 2006-11-13
Posts: 975

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

this is pretty simple:
Kdemod exists for relatively long time, Arch split of KDE is not even official. as i remember Arch KDE maintainer had some problems understanding how some splits were possible. This does not mean that he is less capable of spliting packages but it points out that he(them) has less experience.

Whether his/theirs work is going to be better is quite a long way ahead. Currently experience is on kdemod project side.

On personal note:
1) reinventing the wheel is common but the result is always the same:
waste of time.
If done properly kde splitting projects should join forces to get all this fast and well done

2) few times i observed some state of slight paranoia (thankfully does not concern everybody): asking questions or pointing out bug would meet with "defensive aggression". Asking questions if far from criticizing.

Offline

#20 2009-07-29 19:26:45

phrakture
Arch Overlord
From: behind you
Registered: 2003-10-29
Posts: 7,879
Website

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

broch wrote:

reinventing the wheel is common but the result is always the same: waste of time.

This is a very bold generalization and, as is often the case with broad claims such as this, it is wrong in many cases. Rule of thumb: Saying something is "always" or "never" some way is always wrong (hah!)

Offline

#21 2009-07-29 19:27:29

kensai
Member
From: Puerto Rico
Registered: 2005-06-03
Posts: 2,475
Website

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

@broch, well putting it on perspective, KDEmod is the redundant and waste of time project, why?

At first kdemod was a project which was not centered for package splitting, even though that was one of their features. Kdemod was centered around the patched and customized KDE. They dropped that recently, leaving them with a vanilla but modularized kdemod, which is close to worthless, why because Arch Linux was going to do that for a long time. We cannot do package splitting now being the official distribution? I knew one day being so friendly with the kdemod guys would come and hunt us. And now is the time, they are talking bad about Arch Linux kde effort now and about Pierre as well. Don't bite the hand that feeds you.


Follow me in: Identi.ca, Twitter, Google+

Offline

#22 2009-07-29 20:08:15

scio
Member
From: Buffalo, NY
Registered: 2008-08-05
Posts: 366

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

kensai wrote:

At first kdemod was a project which was not centered for package splitting, even though that was one of their features. Kdemod was centered around the patched and customized KDE. They dropped that recently, leaving them with a vanilla but modularized kdemod, which is close to worthless, why because Arch Linux was going to do that for a long time. We cannot do package splitting now being the official distribution? I knew one day being so friendly with the kdemod guys would come and hunt us. And now is the time, they are talking bad about Arch Linux kde effort now and about Pierre as well. Don't bite the hand that feeds you.

Chakra still does patch KDE, and I feel like the "I knew one day being so friendly with the kdemod guys would come and hunt us" mentality might be why they feel resentment.

Without really looking at the PKGBUILDs, and probably being a bit naive, it seems like chakra could pull the arch builds and then only rebuild the ones they need to patch.  They could submit changes to the PKGBUILDs to facilitate this, but would probably be a lot more work for them.  This would help towards reducing the overlap.

Offline

#23 2009-07-29 20:11:05

broch
Banned
From: L.A. California
Registered: 2006-11-13
Posts: 975

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

personally, I would not care much about who is who and where.

on the other had you need to work on your arguments:

At first kdemod was a project which was not centered for package splitting, even though that was one of their features. Kdemod was centered around the patched and customized KDE. They dropped that recently, leaving them with a vanilla but modularized kdemod, which is close to worthless, why because Arch Linux was going to do that for a long time.

hmm Arch is using "close to worthless" vanilla kernel. What are you saying?

Modularization has nothing to do with customized software. Yes sure, this would be nice addition, but it is nor really required. KDE (and Gnome) got big, both include ridiculous dependencies, so trimming down fat is good idea even without customization.


why because Arch Linux was going to do that for a long time.

For a long time I am planning Mars expedition, better everybody stop their similar projects now (even if more experienced: you know - I am planning this for very long time)


We cannot do package splitting now being the official distribution?

where did I say that Arch should stop?
Now I can point to your arguments suggesting the contrary
starting with worthless modularization of vanilla kde

Don't bite the hand that feeds you.

This is not real argument (or rather really bad one). as I mentioned before: don't be paranoid.

This is a very bold generalization and, as is often the case with broad claims such as this, it is wrong in many cases. Rule of thumb: Saying something is "always" or "never" some way is always wrong (hah!)

shrug...
do you really want to discuss "always"? This would be ridiculos.
"reinventing the wheel" means duplicating basic method that has long since been accepted.
This is always waste of time. People do this if they can't get a hold on already exisitng method, or have no idea that of method existence. Unless someone is learnig and reinventing the wheel gives better understanding of specific process. But this is not the case here.

I bet that jumping under speeding car is not always dangerous. Now start nitpicking. (Not that this has to do anything with kde).

Offline

#24 2009-07-29 20:23:39

Pierre
Developer
From: Bonn
Registered: 2004-07-05
Posts: 1,950
Website

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

Ok, I had prepared a more lengthy answer but now I think any efforts on this discussion will lead to nothing. I still don't get the problem and I have no idea why I should have done something wrong here.

I think its best for me to leave here. Someone else is welcome to mediate this. But maybe its best to just forget about anything that might went wrong or not and see what we can do in future.

Last but not least: Telling anybody that the project he putts lot of efforts into is deprecated or useless is not acceptable!

Offline

#25 2009-07-29 20:32:20

Cerebral
Forum Fellow
From: Waterloo, ON, CA
Registered: 2005-04-08
Posts: 3,108
Website

Re: KDE 4.3 vs KDEmod 4.3 (What is modularization)

Pierre wrote:

Last but not least: Telling anybody that the project he putts lot of efforts into is deprecated or useless is not acceptable!

QFT

Pierre wrote:

Someone else is welcome to mediate this.

Good idea.   Closing - this is becoming a flame war.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB