Am Freitag, 4. September 2009 07:52:56 schrieb Bob S:
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?
It's all in your head!
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.
so you call software that is unmanageable "not broken"? The coed design did not fit the purpose and hence things broke while fixing others. That is broken.
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.
Because those that put resources into KDE decide what they do with their free time. Those that don't and get it for free can take it or leave it but certainly not whine about it or demand anything they are not willing to do themselves. If you want feature x badly, do it yourself or pay for it. If you are not willing to spend anything on it, you have to wait until somebody else is.
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!
I saw that, quite funny and childish plus rather OT for a mailinglist that is now going to be spammed with "yes" and "no" emails.
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.
I rest my case, if you do not remember all the talk about forking KDE3 etc. then it really does not make any sense to discuss this.
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.
If the re-write is that simply, why were there not people that did so? Nobody forced anyone to develop anything for KDE4. And nobody hindered anyone to not contribute to KDE4 by "only" re-writing KDE3 bits.
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.
Then why do people whine about KDE4? You can use it if you like, leave it if you don't. You can of course criticise, but only in a constructive way, i.e. at least bits you use and want to put some effort in. You cannot demand that people owe you an explanation for feature x only because you do not get it. You might ask why feature y was not implemented yet, yet the answer would most probably be: because nobody cared to put some resources into it, including the one asking.
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..................
Yes, I'm as arrogant as to state that those that spend their free time and money on KDE should decide what they would like to work on. Spot on! Sven -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org