On 11/25/2013 10:32 AM, Raymond Wooninck wrote:
On Monday 25 November 2013 15:56:28 Richard Brown wrote:
I agree - Given that gstreamer-0_10 can coexist with gstreamer-1.0, my suggestion would be for KDE to focus on those elements which cannot coexist, like bluez and upower
Who says that KDE is the issue here ? As I indicated in my original email, KDE will not have any problems with the switch to UPower. It already supports UPower 1.0.
My concern is however that other major components of openSUSE are either not seen as important or issues are just being resolved by creating compatibility packages to support the old libraries.
The mere reason behind my email was to create an awareness that openSUSE is not just KDE or GNOME, but has a lot of other desktops, packages, etc that should be supported. As is constantly indicated, a lot can be resolved by just keeping the old release and make it co-existent with the newer library. But did we ever validated this setup ? Yes, it might install, but does it provide an integrated desktop for the user ?
I'm a little concerned that this appears to becoming a bit of reoccurring theme.
Why wasn't this all then discussed in the past ?
It is my understanding that GNOME (both upstream and openSUSE) try to follow and make the most of upstream developments closely - this appears to be where the use of new gstreamer, upower, bluez, systemd, etc all come from. This approach seems to generally work well with the rest of our project at openSUSE, as we generally try to be a distribution that has the latest and greatest stable versions of everything in each release.
Yeah. Take FireFox as an example. Our standard webbrowser. Currently even the latest beta/unstable packages still rely heavily on Gstreamer 0.10. So I assume there goes your statement that this approach seems to generally work well.
KDE does not appear to have that same desire (or ability?) to progress at the same pace as the 'rest of the stack'. Is this a conscious decision by upstream KDE, or is a result of lack of resource?
Again. It is not just KDE. Somehow you like to change this discussion to a KDE versus GNOME issue. Which is not the case. At least the last time I looked, Firefox, libreoffice, etc are not part of KDE.
I personally dislike the idea of slowing down the use of upstream developments if KDE cannot keep up, but at the same time we need to find a satisfactory way of providing a solid platform for our KDE users and as many new developments as their desktop choice can handle
Robert,
s/Robert/Richard/ Please don't blame me, I use XFCE ;)
I know that you are an 100% GNOME person, but again this is not a discussion regarding KDE versus GNOME. Maybe you like it to be as that you can then blame it on KDE.
On a more serious note, I doubt Richard wants to turn this into a KDE vs. GNOME issue, we are certainly past those times.
But just announcing that GNOME requires UPower 1.0 and that the rest simply have to follow, is in my opinion NOT the right approach regarding following upstream development. Did we ever consider Mate, Enlightenment, XFCE, etc ??
The fact that it was me who raised this issue, doesn't make it automatically a KDE issue.
The underlying question here is how do we handle upstream changes, that are only supported by a minority of the openSUSE packages. If the openSUSE community decides that we have to follow all upstream changes and really be on the latest available release of a library, package, etc, then so be it. However then they have to accept that this could mean that a big part of the openSUSE distribution might no longer work.
As an innocent bystander, i.e. not contributing to any DE development, I'd say breaking stuff is bad. If GNOME moves faster than others, due to the fact that they have a large paid contributor base upstream and appear generally to care less about ABI compatibility than they probably should, than, in a way it becomes a problem of the GNOME team in openSUSE to deal with this. Possibly more compatibility work has to be done. We have 5 DEs and all need to be considered IMHO, or our notion of "providing choice" somewhat becomes a hollow promise.
If the decision is however that in all cases everything shipped with openSUSE should work (with all features, etc), then we need to rethink the current way where a single desktop is pushing changes that are incompatible with the other desktops, applications.
Agreed, one would hope that there is a way to distribute the work and keep various versions of things at the same time. My $0.02 Robert -- Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU SUSE-IBM Software Integration Center LINUX Tech Lead Public Cloud Architect rjschwei@suse.com rschweik@ca.ibm.com 781-464-8147 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org