On Thursday 03 September 2009 03:12:10 Sven Burmeister wrote:
Am Montag, 31. August 2009 02:14:22 schrieb Doug McGarrett:
it's an ever changing world.
One thing that's often forgotten is that change does not always mean better.
Change means: difference If you like it or not, has nother to do with being better or not.
If, for one reason, you decide KDE-3.5 is "better", no one will stop you from becoming an additional maintainer for kde-3.5 for 11.3, 12.0 and so on! Wasn't that one of the pradigms of opensource: "use the Source,Luke" ;-)
What makes you think that all of us are programmers?
First of all Sven, I would like to know who appointed you as the authority on KDE3 vs KDE4? You seem to be the bully-boy for KDE4. Do you work for Novell? or anyone else that has an interest in promoting KDE4?.or just some opinionated guy with a talent for espousing words?
You do not need to be a programmer to get a kde3 repo going, just interest and time. If you cannot supply the latter two, why should others do so if you do not pay them? Further, elsewhere in this mailinglist users demand an official kde3 repo because it is "static" and not much work to handle. If so, where are the users that do so? Is there not even one user around of those millions that prefer kde3 over 4?
I would guess that you are 100% correct on this point,
I've done a little bit of BASIC, and an even smaller bit of Pascal, and that was quite a while ago. It would seem to me that the old Anne Landers regime, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," applies here.
Broken for who? KDE3 was broken by design and hence not fixable in many areas, especially the desktop and panel.
Wrong....not brpken by design but as it developed it became unmanageable. I fully concur that it probably needed a complete re-write. But, why, during a re-write add all the extra "bling" when it was'nt necessary, to get back to basics, with an eye towards adding all of that later, when appropriate.
Those that spend their free time on the software you use for free decided they did not want to work on such bad code anymore but have a proper basis for the future.
Absolutely correct as explained previously with caveats.
But even if we leave the programming bit aside. Just because KDE3 was not broken for you does not mean it was not broken for others.
That is a pretty wild statement. It must just come from your own mind. I would really like to know who thinks KDE3 was broken. I will start a new thread,"KDE3 broken? Yes or No" Let's vote!
So while you can continue to use your not broken KDE3 with a little bit of effort (which you do not seem willing to invest), you want to force others to do the same and not create KDE4 although those are the ones that supply you with free software and also gave you your beloved KDE3. How selfish of them to make their own decisions about their own life and timespending!
Oh come on. for God's sake. Nobody has ever said that KDE4 should not be created and everyone here appreciates and applauds the efforts of the developers who created KDE3 and afterwards, createdKDE4.That is not at issue. That is your own biased perception.
Just because what somebody in SuSE-land thinks KDE could look prettier, or sexier, or just different is no excuse to make it obsolete. There are so many things that guys bitch about, that really _are_ broke, and seem never to get addressed in spite of bug reports--why bother with bug reports at all, if the clowns screwing up a perfectly good desktop don't address them?
"Perfectly good" is more than debatable. People just got used to its bugs and issues.
No it's not, if you are referring to KDE3. Sure it had some minor bugs but not at it's maturist level. KDE4 has many many bugs that are not yet resolved. Several times as many as KDE3 ever had. All of which could have been avoided witha simple re-write without the "bling" and then go forward from there. Just like what was done/happened in KDE3.
Open source is about voluntarily spending your free time on software others use for free. So either you do so to get the software you want or you have no right to claim anything.
You are absolutely correct there. No arguement.But that doesn't mean it could'nt have been done differently, or more end-user oriented.
Of course you can also replace spending your free time with spending money on people that do what you want, but as long as you do not supply any resources, those that do decide.
Give us a break, OK? You are one righteous arrogant.................. Bob S -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org