On 2011-10-25 10:57:48 (+0200), jdd <jdd(a)dodin.org> wrote:
Le 25/10/2011 10:33, Matt Gray a écrit :
It is a fine thing that opensuse is flexible thing
accommodating the needs of many, but marketing what is demonstrably the
past will not help opensuse grow, and will distract potential users from
the real innovations contained therein.
I don't agree.
I can perfectly accept the security reasons, but is kde so exposed
to security risks (apart may be konkeror)?
Yes. Cmon, if Will says so, it's yes. How much C++ coding in Qt3
and KDE3 have you done to question his opinion on this ?
Thought so, so it's "yes".
There are lots and lots of places in the code base that are
potentially subject to security issues.
If you're not a software developer, then please take the word of
a software developer for it.
Please show some respect for the opinion of the people who have
a clue here. And it doesn't get more experienced in this topic
than with Will.
But the fact that openSUSE follow the user for a long
Depends, it also has a high cost in maintenance. We can't have
both new features and dragging along barely maintained stuff for
ages. It might make sense in very specific situations (such as
when KDE4 wasn't really ready for broad usage), but not in this
New user may be glad to understand that openSUSE wont
let him down
at the next unnecessary change, if ever once kde developpers (or any
other) want to change to what ever they imagine is better, like they
did for kde3->kde4.
If they care about that, we already "let them down" because of
the rather short lifetime.
And if upstream (the KDE developers, in this case) changes the
software, we cannot do anything about it, that's just how it
Actually, as Will said, even shipping KDE3 with the distribution
is wrong in the first place, as we have no idea how long the few
people who currently maintain KDE3 will be able to keep up their
work. And it puts a heavy burden on the security and KDE teams
at openSUSE, because they will be the ones who will have to fix
the security issues when they arise, if it isn't done by the
current KDE3 maintainers upstream.
And we all only have so much time in a day: what needs to be
done there will take time to do other (undoubtedly more useful)
This don't mean we have to follow everything, but
is some users are
voluteer enough to make a follow up, we have to thank them and
advertise the result. If not, why advertise evergreen? or Tumbleweed
(how many maintainer have them??)
Of course, we have to word this accordingly. having kde3 is not the
last brand new info, but having a "we wont let you alone" chapter is
But still, it's just wrong to advertise that as a new feature of
12.1 and to emphasize it.
If the handful of people who currently maintain KDE3 give up,
which is very likely to happen because:
1) almost no one uses KDE3 any more, so the effort is rather
2) they're just a handful of people and it's doubtful they know
their way around the code base that well
... then what?
That boldly advertised great new feature of 12.1 will explode in
our face. Well, not your face, you won't have to maintain the
Really, having it in the distro is wrong in the first place, and
advertising it boldly as an important new feature of 12.1 will
only make matters worse.
-o) Pascal Bleser
-- we haz green
-- we haz conf