linchat wrote:To the team of Kde,

I have been a Linux user for 10+ years, where most of my time on the desktop is spent in Windows and server time spent in Linux. I have always wanted to commit to Linux on the desktop but always found some reason or another that I could not do so. Please welcome KDE 4.0.

WOW! When 4.0 first made its appearance, I was inspired, but could not commit for obvious reasons. As I watched the progression and tried live versions I could really see KDE coming along nicely.

I download Kubuntu 8.10 and upgraded KDE. Outstanding! KDE is like a breath of fresh air delicately brushing up against the Linux world. It is elegant, unique, bold and above all useful! This is what Linux has been begging for, a Linux desktop adapted to modern computing!

It is definitely abnormal in allot of ways, and I like that. Linux can use something special to really set itself apart, KDE fits the bill. I would say Apple and Microsoft might be looking at KDE for some idea's.

Some people may not see the importance of Linux on the Desktop. But no vendor or operating system will stand the test of time unless it satisfies both the server and desktop world (imho). We know Linux has the server world and getting a strong showing in portable devices, and with the advent of KDE 4, I think Linux has a shot at putting on some desktop user weight.

I remember some years back reading an article on how KDE really wanted to put a stronger emphasis on usability and design. These were the opening talks of KDE 4.

GREAT JOB KDE! It goes to show that hard work and perseverance do pay off.

You know, today I tried to install ktorrent into Sidux, and apt-get responded by attempting to overwrite my KDE3 desktop with KDE4... and so today became the day that I became absolutely convinced that KDE3 must be forked. In the eyes of the distros, KDE3 is dead, not matter how many millions of users it currently has. A separate Desktop with a tenth of the user base would get more respect, and perhaps present less problems, for the distros.

I'm not a developer, so I can't do anything to bring this about, but I'm pretty sure it's going to happen anyway, because it's going to be needed. That's the way it works. And if it doesn't happen, it's because it wasn't needed, and I'm wrong. Either way, there's nothing to get worked up about.

Those who fear that a fork will divide the KDE community need only look to this thread. Lots of people love KDE4 as much as others hate it, and KDE isn't going to need to hold onto every one of us in order to strengthen and expand the KDE community. You can't have it both ways. You can't cut us loose and hold onto us at the same time. You can't have upheaval without... upheaval. But it's going to be all right, and I congratulate the KDE team on their important work.

blackbelt_jones wrote:You know, today I tried to install ktorrent into Sidux, and apt-get responded by attempting to overwrite my KDE3 desktop with KDE4... and so today became the day that I became absolutely convinced that KDE3 must be forked. In the eyes of the distros, KDE3 is dead, not matter how many millions of users it currently has. A separate Desktop with a tenth of the user base would get more respect, and perhaps present less problems, for the distros.

I'm not a developer, so I can't do anything to bring this about, but I'm pretty sure it's going to happen anyway, because it's going to be needed. That's the way it works. And if it doesn't happen, it's because it wasn't needed, and I'm wrong. Either way, there's nothing to get worked up about.

Those who fear that a fork will divide the KDE community need only look to this thread. Lots of people love KDE4 as much as others hate it, and KDE isn't going to need to hold onto every one of us in order to strengthen and expand the KDE community. You can't have it both ways. You can't cut us loose and hold onto us at the same time. You can't have upheaval without... upheaval. But it's going to be all right, and I congratulate the KDE team on their important work.

Uhm, is KDE4 even in Sid yet? From what I've heard, it's only in experimental, so I wouldn't be surprised if one replaces the other. And you have to remember that Sidux is a "bleeding edge" distribution and the developers have stated that when KDE4 replaces KDE3 in Sid they will support KDE4.

It's not that all distributions want to make their users switch to KDE4, but that YOUR distribution wants to take that path. If that's not the kind of choice you want, don't use that distribution.

This is a distribution decision, not a KDE decision, so a request for KDE to fork is unrealistic. And remember, a fork is one of the worst things that can happen to a free software project. If you were truly concerned about the future of KDE (and that means KDE4) then you wouldn't want the project to be divided. More development on KDE3 would just lead to less improvements in KDE4. Since the rate of development of KDE4 is much faster than what could be in KDE3, more effort would be required for less new features.

I'm sorry if that came off as harsh, but (IMHO) your logic is flawed, and what you are proposing would hurt the KDE project as a whole.

blackbelt_jones wrote:You know, today I tried to install ktorrent into Sidux, and apt-get responded by attempting to overwrite my KDE3 desktop with KDE4... and so today became the day that I became absolutely convinced that KDE3 must be forked. In the eyes of the distros, KDE3 is dead, not matter how many millions of users it currently has. A separate Desktop with a tenth of the user base would get more respect, and perhaps present less problems, for the distros.

I'm not a developer, so I can't do anything to bring this about, but I'm pretty sure it's going to happen anyway, because it's going to be needed. That's the way it works. And if it doesn't happen, it's because it wasn't needed, and I'm wrong. Either way, there's nothing to get worked up about.

Those who fear that a fork will divide the KDE community need only look to this thread. Lots of people love KDE4 as much as others hate it, and KDE isn't going to need to hold onto every one of us in order to strengthen and expand the KDE community. You can't have it both ways. You can't cut us loose and hold onto us at the same time. You can't have upheaval without... upheaval. But it's going to be all right, and I congratulate the KDE team on their important work.

You know, there are two ktorrent packages in Sid/Sidux. «ktorrent» uses KDE4 libraries and «ktorrent2.2» which uses KDE3 libraries. Anyway, installing the former *shouldn't* install anything from KDE4 except for the core libraries. And if it does, it is a bug, please report it.

KDE3 is still alive. I invite you to use Debian or SimplyMEPIS which provide great KDE3 packages.

Thanks for hijacking the thread btw.

jrick wrote:

blackbelt_jones wrote:You know, today I tried to install ktorrent into Sidux, and apt-get responded by attempting to overwrite my KDE3 desktop with KDE4... and so today became the day that I became absolutely convinced that KDE3 must be forked. In the eyes of the distros, KDE3 is dead, not matter how many millions of users it currently has. A separate Desktop with a tenth of the user base would get more respect, and perhaps present less problems, for the distros.

I'm not a developer, so I can't do anything to bring this about, but I'm pretty sure it's going to happen anyway, because it's going to be needed. That's the way it works. And if it doesn't happen, it's because it wasn't needed, and I'm wrong. Either way, there's nothing to get worked up about.

Those who fear that a fork will divide the KDE community need only look to this thread. Lots of people love KDE4 as much as others hate it, and KDE isn't going to need to hold onto every one of us in order to strengthen and expand the KDE community. You can't have it both ways. You can't cut us loose and hold onto us at the same time. You can't have upheaval without... upheaval. But it's going to be all right, and I congratulate the KDE team on their important work.

Uhm, is KDE4 even in Sid yet? From what I've heard, it's only in experimental, so I wouldn't be surprised if one replaces the other. And you have to remember that Sidux is a "bleeding edge" distribution and the developers have stated that when KDE4 replaces KDE3 in Sid they will support KDE4.

It's not that all distributions want to make their users switch to KDE4, but that YOUR distribution wants to take that path. If that's not the kind of choice you want, don't use that distribution.

This is a distribution decision, not a KDE decision, so a request for KDE to fork is unrealistic. And remember, a fork is one of the worst things that can happen to a free software project. If you were truly concerned about the future of KDE (and that means KDE4) then you wouldn't want the project to be divided. More development on KDE3 would just lead to less improvements in KDE4. Since the rate of development of KDE4 is much faster than what could be in KDE3, more effort would be required for less new features.

I'm sorry if that came off as harsh, but (IMHO) your logic is flawed, and what you are proposing would hurt the KDE project as a whole.

It might hurt your KDE. My KDE is being killed. It's not just any distribution we're talking about. It's Debian. Last month it was Ubuntu. I hear that SUSE is going to be next. Guess what? KDE is divided. KDE has already been forked. And there's really nothing wrong with that. KDE4 is an important project, but it's also a huge departure. When they recreated KDE, that was a fork. Not officially, but de facto. That's the reality. It's already happened but we're not supposed to talk about it. Be free. Don't look back. Sorry, but if I can't look back, then (for me) that's not being free.

I don't think KDE3 needs a lot of development. It needs a separate identity, a life of its own. The problem is that the distributions can't seem to conceive of two KDEs coexisting, and KDE 3 and KDE4 are getting tangled up together in the repositories. I think somebody just needs to change all the names. If I knoew more about this, maybe I'd If it were up to me, I'd just rename everything, and keep mainatining it the way KDE had always intended, but it's not up to me. I can't make it happen, and I may be wrong. I'm certainly not requesting anything. I just think that it's inevitable. The way free software works is that if a fork is necessary, it's going to happen. I think it's going to be necessary.

There's nothing wrong with that. KDE is going to lose people over this, but the success and innovation of KDE4 is going to attract many more users and developers than a fork will cost you. I hear it runs on Windows, for God's sake! You're going to have more developers than you can handle. There's nothing to go to war over.

And I don't think that I hijacked the thread. I was impressed by the original post, and inspired by it. It makes my point for me: KDE4 is going to be a huge success, and you're not going to miss us. There's no need to treat each suggestion of a fork as Death threat. Relax.[hr]

I don't know exactly what happened in Sidux, but I know I couldn't install 180 mb of files on my RAMdisk. Doesn't matter.

blackbelt_jones:

I don't see a need for a fork and I even less see it happen.

KDE (3) has a huge codebase. To maintain and even further develop it you need a lot of developers which either be experienced with Qt/KDE technolgoies or have to learn that before.

I don't think that there are many interessted in that to develop on a something which is outdated based on an old version of Qt, on aRts and so on. It's boring when you (as developer) could instead work on KDE 4 where you could really change something using new technologies. They only possibiliy to see a fork happen is if someone pays developers for that. But well, that seems even more unlikely.

And well, for the need to fork:

KDE 4 is in most parts KDE 3 ported to Qt4 and other new things (Phonon, Akanadi (soon)). Otherwise a lot of things are the same only updated.

The few most importend changes and points where I could see reasons for a fork are the replacements of kicker and kdesktop with plasma and the dropping of the Konqueror filemanagment kpart (now replace by the Dolphin one).

About Plasma and Kicker:
Plasmas development is very fast at the moment. With KDE 4.2 it will have most features of kicker back. Though missing some (3rd party) applets. But I think with KDE 4.2 shipped with the python and other scripting engines we will see tons of 3rd party plasma applets to really bring the plasma panel on par with kicker.

Instead of a fork I think it is more likley and resonable to just write a new Plasma panel applet or desktop applet. Or even port kicker. That is less work and will bring otherwise all the new possiblites and updated software (for example ktorrent 4 is where the development takes place, same for any other KDE software).

Dolphin and Konqueror filemanagment:
Also here Dolphin has added lots of possibilites with KDE 4.1 and 4.2. When you look at the settings you will find a lot things which make Dolphim more than only a very basic file manager. And yes it is in some points still behind Konqueror. But in this case: It is easier and more future proof to bring the missing things to Dolphin or even port the Konq kpart of KDE 3.

So lets assume for example you can find two developers which are willing to work fulltime on forking KDE 3. Sure they will be able to maintain int somehow. Even add a small feature here and there. But in the long run they are lost. KDE as a whole will move on, the apps for KDE 3 will get older and outdated and the KDE 4 conuterparts will get more and more features.

So if you really have this two developers it would a lot more to put one on improving the Plasma panel and desktop and one to develop on Dolphin/Konqueror (which is using the same parts).

I know you do not have those two developers. This just should explain why it is more reasonable to put the effort of a fork directly into KDE 4. It is not very different then KDE 3. The missing things could be added a lot faster then doing a fork which will evolve very slow and I think die anyway in the long run.

I can understand why you want to stick with KDE 3 for now. No problem, pick a distrbution which supports that and wait for KDE 4.3,4.4 or even 4.5. At the moment KDE 4 is missing one thing or another but on the other side it is in a lot of things way ahead of KDE 3. But KDE 4 is nothing totaly different. Most software is the same just ported and with a few new features. I so no reason not to like KDE 4 when you liked KDE 3 at the time it reachs feature partiy.

And putting all effort into that instead of a fork will also help you.

Could be. I know the arguments.

I happen to be using KDE 4.1.3 right now, and I see that one of my favorite Konqueror features, the filter bar, has been restored. Very nice! :thumbs_up:

The thing is, I too am in awe of KDE4, and it's pretty clear that KDE4 is the right direction for KDE development.

But..."all effort"? What does that mean exactly? Everybody working toward one goal? No Gnome, no XFCE, no fluxbox? Do these entities weaken free software with their existence? You may think so, I do not.

If it's not necessary, it's not going to happen, and that's fine too. I'm oh so very accustomed to being wrong. It happens alllllllll the time. Let's just wait and see.

What I dislike about Plasma is Plasma itself, the invisible shield between me and the Desktop. I can't imagine real feature parity without KDE4 becoming even more complicated. When it happens, I will be convinced. So if you think it's going to happen, you've got nothing to worry about. But you have nothing to worry about, either way. KDE4 will attract more users and developers than it will alienate, and that's what counts. What more do you expect? There are billions of Windows users for us all to plunder. But you can't have upheaval without upheaval. That's not realistic.[hr]

Dryfit wrote:Blackbelt_jones you making from a postive thread a negative thread,

It's all good.

You know, KDE4.1.3 is pretty sweet. I think I could be wrong about a fork being necessary, but right or wrong, it just doesn't matter. What I think doesn't matter. KDE4 is going to be a huge success, and it deserves to be a huge success. It doesn't have to be all things to all people to be awesome and important.

I almost laughed out loud when I realised this thread had been forked.

Moult wrote:I almost laughed out loud when I realised this thread had been forked.

When you pointed it out, I absolutely did!:-D

Oh Fork it!

As far as KDE loosing users, those who are complaining about changes need to give KDE a little bit of room to grow. If you cannot look at 4.x and see the possibilities, your blind. But what makes it great is that those possibilities are becoming reality.

I guarantee you other desktops and commercial O/S's are looking at KDE 4.x and going WOW!

As the saying goes, "If you build it, they will come".

They will come.

linchat wrote:Oh Fork it!

As far as KDE loosing users, those who are complaining about changes need to give KDE a little bit of room to grow. If you cannot look at 4.x and see the possibilities, your blind. But what makes it great is that those possibilities are becoming reality.

I guarantee you other desktops and commercial O/S's are looking at KDE 4.x and going WOW!

As the saying goes, "If you build it, they will come".

They will come.

I agree with all of this. I'm very very impressed with KDE 4.1.3. It's not something I'm going to want to use all the time. It's a little too... uh, "Las Vegas" for my taste. But I can see that it's just killer. And it's way beyond eye candy!

Now, I'm a special case, because I like to run KDE applications in fluxbox, and then when I use KDE proper, it's for specific purposes. Usually, it's for doing things that generate files, and I use the desktop for catching files. For about three years now, I've been creating my own possibilities by creating custom menus and shortcuts that take advantage of Konqueror's incredible flexibility. When this whole thing started, I was really mad at the changes in Konqueror, but now I can see that it's coming right along. So I'm sure I'll be able to live with KDE4, but I don't think KDE3 should be lost before its time. It's the highest expression of what will one day be known as the pre-KDE4 era.

KDE4 is a really well thought-out desktop, and I think that may limit the possibilities for creative applications by a minority of users.

I'll say it again. I don't think KDE3 needs any more development than was intended for it. All it really needs is a seperate identity, a new name that doesn't automatically mean "obsolete". That's the kind of forking that I'd like to see. The same cereal in a slightly different box. Its... it's legacy. It's a classic.! Because of Qt3, it may not live forever, but it's still got some good years.

KDE4 will definitely be the star from here on in. There's no disputing that. Hell, I'm using it right now!

jrick wrote:And remember, a fork is one of the worst things that can happen to a free software project.

Not necessarily, just look at Xfree vs. Xorg.

That said, Mr. Blackbelt is totally free to fork KDE3. No-one is stopping him or anyone else from doing it. Of course the current KDE-developers would probably have no interest in actively working on KDE3, so the people working on the forked KDE3 would not really harm KDe4, since they weren't KDE-developers to begin with, they would be new developers. Maybe even in the ling run they would benefit KDE, since it would be qyuite easy for them to start working on KDE4 instead, after they realize that KDE3 is a dead-end.

We had this discussion this in the german KDE forum, too. And sometimes it comes up again

Why is KDE4 already out? In KDE3 everything worked fine, in KDE4 nothing really works at all. tbc

But I think: Nobody said KDE4.0 is already the very final KDE4 version. But this is open source. You release software and say: "Okay guys, here we've some code, how do you think about it?" Then thousends of "little users" come like ants and improve the code bit for bit.

blackbelt_jones wrote:I'll say it again. I don't think KDE3 needs any more development than was intended for it. All it really needs is a seperate identity, a new name that doesn't automatically mean "obsolete". That's the kind of forking that I'd like to see. The same cereal in a slightly different box. Its... it's legacy. It's a classic.! Because of Qt3, it may not live forever, but it's still got some good years.

Ok, if it is only that, that you do not need any fork. Do you really think that a different name for that what we know as KDE 3.5.10 ( I even think it is as well possible we see a 3.5.11 sometime) will change anything (in terms of distro support?).

And yes I think KDE 3.5 has still some good years. It delivers are really good feature rich desktop. We have used it for years.

Most distros will move on to KDE 4 sooner or later. I think with KDE 4.2 or with 4.3 every distro will but most effort in KDE 4 packages instead of KDE 3.5. But I also think that for the next few years there will be distributions which provide KDE 3.5 packages. And then there will be user repositories and at least the source to build it on your own.

So, well where do you see a need for a "renaming fork"? Nobody take you away from KDE 3.5, you will be able to use it for a long time with or without a rename.

Another example: Apache 2. There are still users of Apache 1 and so there are distros (it is not Ubuntu ;- ) which still have Apache 1 packages. There was no need to do renaming fork to make that possible.

And btw: A just renamed KDE 3.5 with a few bugfixes or even mini features added will not make Kubuntu rethink its position and ship that.

If you really want to make a difference to help the future of KDE 3.5 and its availability to the average users:

Get a true community distro with KDE 3 packages (Debian or Arch Linux with KDEmod for example) and get involved in maintaining the KDE 3 packages. It should not be too much of work as well they are not much new releases. When those distros have enough users of the KDE 3 packages and also people who are helping mainting those, they will not drop them.

So: Instead of opening a new thread every week about the need of a fork (a renaming fork *g*) just do something yourself to help KDE 3 packages to survive. That is way easier than organize a fork which will change nothing. I don't think that debian or the KDEmod Archlinux guys will drop KDE 3 as long as their are enough users and people maintaining the packages.

DanielW wrote:

blackbelt_jones wrote:I'll say it again. I don't think KDE3 needs any more development than was intended for it. All it really needs is a seperate identity, a new name that doesn't automatically mean "obsolete". That's the kind of forking that I'd like to see. The same cereal in a slightly different box. Its... it's legacy. It's a classic.! Because of Qt3, it may not live forever, but it's still got some good years.

Ok, if it is only that, that you do not need any fork. Do you really think that a different name for that what we know as KDE 3.5.10 ( I even think it is as well possible we see a 3.5.11 sometime) will change anything (in terms of distro support?).

And yes I think KDE 3.5 has still some good years. It delivers are really good feature rich desktop. We have used it for years.

Most distros will move on to KDE 4 sooner or later. I think with KDE 4.2 or with 4.3 every distro will but most effort in KDE 4 packages instead of KDE 3.5. But I also think that for the next few years there will be distributions which provide KDE 3.5 packages. And then there will be user repositories and at least the source to build it on your own.

So, well where do you see a need for a "renaming fork"? Nobody take you away from KDE 3.5, you will be able to use it for a long time with or without a rename.

Another example: Apache 2. There are still users of Apache 1 and so there are distros (it is not Ubuntu ;- ) which still have Apache 1 packages. There was no need to do renaming fork to make that possible.

And btw: A just renamed KDE 3.5 with a few bugfixes or even mini features added will not make Kubuntu rethink its position and ship that.

If you really want to make a difference to help the future of KDE 3.5 and its availability to the average users:

Get a true community distro with KDE 3 packages (Debian or Arch Linux with KDEmod for example) and get involved in maintaining the KDE 3 packages. It should not be too much of work as well they are not much new releases. When those distros have enough users of the KDE 3 packages and also people who are helping mainting those, they will not drop them.

So: Instead of opening a new thread every week about the need of a fork (a renaming fork *g*) just do something yourself to help KDE 3 packages to survive. That is way easier than organize a fork which will change nothing. I don't think that debian or the KDEmod Archlinux guys will drop KDE 3 as long as their are enough users and people maintaining the packages.

Like I said in the beginning, I wasn't requesting a fork, I just thought it was inevitable. I'm backing away from that, but either way, nothing to be feared. What am I actually doing about this? I think I've already said that I've started using KDE4. Do I feel like I'm being forced into this change? Yes I do... but it's far better than to allow myself to be chased from distro to distro. And hell, it's also pretty awesome. I can live with it.

It's not to be feared. That's my point, and I see that most people agree with me. So that's cool.