Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
KDE GUI

KDevelop 1.2 is out 59

Posted by HeUnique from the excellent-program-if-I-may-say-so dept.
As the title says - KDevelop 1.2 is out. From the announcement: This version contains many new translations, support for GNOME application development, several improvements in the doc browser and integrated debugger and many bugfixes. You might want to check also the KDE Development Kit if you're using C/C++ (and QT Libs) to write KDE Applications. Great work guys!
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

KDevelop 1.2 is out More

KDevelop 1.2 is out

Comments Filter:
  • > This ended Debian's argument.
    No, this started it. Debian's peoples don't like implicit rights.
    > edit the copyright notice on your GPL'd project
    No, I mean the one of the KDevelop version you're using.
    > We need a babel fish for ppl who can't write :/
    <sarcasm>Mr Coward, I've read some of your post and you make far more typos and error than me.</sarcasm>
  • I was also speculating why it exists.

    It exists because people want it. There are people unlike ourselves who may want to develop software with the minimum of fuss and bother. This will suit them. It's like driving a car, you just get in the thing and put your foot down. Do you care what makes it work underneath? I sure don't, unless somethings wrong with it I just use it. This is the same principle.

    Now weary traveller, rest your head. For just like me, you're utterly dead.
  • Well.. you could always re-create your custom directory structure within KDevelop.

    Yeah, it's a bit of work... but if you like the tools KDevelop provides, it'd be worth it.

    KDevelop's not really targeted at that sort of thing, though. It's an answer to Microsoft Visual C++ and Visual Basic, for managing projects of a certain form.
  • Yeah, and I suppose you prefer to use xxgdb for debugging too?

    *uncontrollable laughter*

  • Titlebar - Use Mac Menu mode. Then you only have a titlebar for the active window.

    Toolbar - click on the handle to hide it.

    Launchbar - click on the buttons on either end to hide it.

    Taskbar - can be turned off -- just use the middle click to get a task list

    KDevelop's frames can be resized. It is a standard splitter widget. KDevelop2.x (currently in development) has dock widgets like VC++ and Visual Slickedit. (VS is available for linux too.)

    All key combinations can be changed.

    All KDE apps expect people to customize their colors; no colors are hard coded.

    Once again, it is not a total clone of windows! You might be arguing about the default configuration, but not kde as a whole.


    -- Thrakkerzog
  • Bah.. Why use emacs, when you can use /bin/sh? It has cat built-in, after all. Type in your code in one go. Real programmers don't write bugs.

    Don't even get me started on what kind of people use makefiles and debuggers.
  • COMMAND.COM 's the shell that has type built-in.

    So I guess DOS is the ideal environment, after all.
  • I'd Rather Use ICBMs.

    ^Z

  • For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable.

    Aha! The key phrase here is clearly any associated interface definition files .

    The way I read it, that applies to headers associated with "all modules it contains", where "it" is the GPL code. And, I wouldn't say that Qt is a module of KDevelop at all.

    Secondly, reading further down the paragraph, the GPL blows away the argument further:

    However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable.

    KDE is the default desktop of SuSE, Caldera, and Mandrake, of distributions off of the top of my head. It also is included with Red Hat, and Slackware. Thus Qt is normally distributed with the operating system. And, Qt itself does not accompany the executible (since it's dynamically linked), so the special exception applies.

    Thirdly, you mention that the GPL does not prohibit use of the program. Distributing a tarball of Qt-using GPL code does not violate the GPL. Distributiong a dynamically linked binary of Qt-using GPL code does not violate the GPL. It's just that distributing such things is, in essense, distributing a kit for violating the GPL.

    So what if a staticly linked version of KDevelop would break the GPL when distributed? In the grand tradition of computing, the answer is "Don't do that!"

  • cat just defaults to reading from the console.

    type is brain damaged; you have to run

    type cat > foo.c
  • The observation about colors is that sometimes picture on buttons are drawn in grey rather than the user colours. I can't think which apps do this (Which I realise kind of scuppers my argument) but it looks ugly when it happens.

    The problem with the ways to regain screen space is that you lose the functionality, or increase the time it takes to perform an operation. I want to have both space and functionality. Or at least a more customizeable tradeoff. Something like allowing the taskbar to be half a screen wide, and the option to shrink the toolbar buttons to any size.
  • Regardless of distro, I always remove K* and qt* from it right away.

    As I recall, it's something like $1550 per developer to develop closed source or commercial applications using the QT libs. That's a showstopper here.

    Isn't gnome and glibc LGPL? that obviates the issue. If only there were some way to hack all the various C++/C libraries out there into something to replace Qt.

    For a lot less than $1550 you can get a new copie of Win2K and VisualC++ pro, last time I checked pricewatch.

    Otherwise, I'd be using KDevelop tomorrow...but nooooooooooo......
  • Allow me to put in a third program into the fray: MicroEdge's Visual SlickEdit [slickedit.com].

    KDevelop looks and works just like (with a less features) just like SlickEdit. It's got syntax highlighting, object viewer, etc, etc. The build frame and browse frame are in the same locations as KDevelop <sarcasm>What a striking resemblence it has!</sarcasm>

    Seriously, KDevelop, Visual Studio, and SlickEdit all share the same interface. Who developed it first? Hell if I know, but there must be something to the layout, if three different programs use it.... Anyway, I use SlickEdit at work, and it's the neatest thing on the planet as far as I'm concerned. It's basically a frontend for all your favorite command line tools. Does multiple language syntax highlighting. You can brew your own syntax rules (Great for in-house languages). There's a ton of other feautures I never use.

    However, SlickEdit costs $500 bucks a pop. I would never shell out that much (the upgrades are bad too) when you've got nice little KDevelop here that implements all my favorite features and is free to boot. Where I work, the various developers depend on different pieces of SlickEdit, not all of which are implemented in KDevelop or Visual Studio.

    I really don't have a point to this, but just to say the visual interface of KDevelop is not exclusive to MS software and that there are professionals that use that *kind* of visual interface (not explicitly KDevelop) in the production environment.
  • The way I read it, that applies to headers associated with "all modules it contains", where "it" is the GPL code. And, I wouldn't say that Qt is a module of KDevelop at all.

    In my opinion, the "it" refers to the executable work, and I would definitely consider Qt to be a module of KDevelop.


    --

  • No, type is useless to emulate cat. You cant edit files with type, the way you can do with cat (cat > file). But, you can alway use copy con file and copy file con.

    But, then again, Id prefer KDevelop over DOS.

  • That's simply not true

    Manual shift was/is the only option on cars for regular people. Automatic was an option on executive cars and more so these days.

    It has nothing to do with choice, there simply isn't one.
    .oO0Oo.
  • Europeans drive manual shift cars because it is just much more fun (for them).
    They use to drive in a much more aggressive way also.

    Well, I think I am way off-topic ...
  • So would you agree that the "special exception" applies?
  • I would have to say Me Too to that post, I think that KDE does work great (Besides I can't beat reversi!) . And I think it is a great thing that you can make it look and feel like Windows.

    But the great thing is, that it doesn't have to just be Windows. After all, who would want to use the Windows GUI, when they could use the MacOS GUI, which KDE can also mimic (although not as closely as it does Windows). After playing around with the WindowsGUI in KDE, I switched over to the MacOS GUI, which I think is alot more stylish.

    If only someone could think up a Linux desktop that was even more similiar to the Mac look, feel, and function, then everything would be perfect in the world.

  • GPL Reminder, remember what it SAYS (Score:4)

    by alexhmit01 ( 104757 ) on Thursday May 04, 2000 @02:11AM (#1093412)
    As a reminder, the GPL explicitly states that you can use the software freely WITHOUT agreeing to the license. However, if you would like to distribute it, you must agree to the license, or you may not.

    This is obvious, because copyright law DOES NOT give you the right to prevent people from using your works, only from distributing them. If I write a book, I can put a license that say only people with a name beginning with a vowel may read this book, but I would NOT be able to legally enforce this. I could refuse to sell it to them, and refuse to allow anyone else to sell it to them, and make everyone agree to keep it from them. However, if someone gets it, I can't do ANYTHING to them, however, I can sue the person who provided it to them for copyright infringement.

    Why is this? Copyright means that nobody can copy or distribute something other than me. I can sell my copyright (someone else can then have those rights), I can also license it out. A license is an agreement to do something. The GPL is a license that allows you to distribute the copyrighted work and derivatives under certain circumstances.

    As a USER, I can certainly combine any amounts of software however I want. Indeed, if my friend buys software that I can't buy and gives it to me, there is NOTHING that anybody can do to me. They can go after my friend if he agreed to not give it to me, but otherwise, they can do nothing.

    The KDE/QPL thing is quite silly. KDE developers are free to develop their stuff however they want. Additionally, they can distribute it however they want. The only issue became whether you could distribute the combined issue. KDE clearly wants you to be able to, Trolls clearly wants you to be able to. What is the problem? If you are distributing the combination and are concerned, I suggest writing a letter to both organizations requesting permission. I'm certain that you will get it, and then you can distribute.

    There was a statement somewhere in this mess claiming that they don't buy the "you can have it on your disk without permission" arguement... well, you can. You have the right to use this software. If you have questions regarding your right to distribute, contact the copyright owners requesting it. Request the ability to include their permission with your copies for everyone who receives it through you to have that explicit permission.

    If you would like your version of KDE under the FSF's suggested version of the GPL (which is the GPL's code with a statement giving permission to distribute with QT or other QPL'd software), I bet that the KDE people would license your version under that agreement. In that scenario, that you would have a completely legal license to distribute it. In that scenario, offer Debian a copy of your licensed KDE, which is perfectly legal with no question.

    Alex
  • I didn't say anyone is forcing anybody. The UNIX way is proven to work. KDevelop seems to exits because it can attract people coming from windows who know visual c++.

    I don't have a big problem with it as long as I can still choose to use emacs/gcc/gmake/bash/grep, etc.. and I can with Linux - it's my choice!

    It's all about choice.
  • > So, why flame KDevelop ?

    I'm not flaming KDevelop.

    I was asking how many are using it in a production environment.

    I was also speculating why it exists.

  • GNOME support? (Score:3)

    by LotR ( 25039 ) on Thursday May 04, 2000 @03:20AM (#1093415)

    Oh nice I thought, KDevelop supports GNOME, now it might become interesting to use it. All that support seems to mean is this gnome.tar.gz file in the templates directory containing much of the gnome-hello package.

    I wouldn't call that GNOME support, since this doesn't seem any more helpful than just giving people an editor and the gnome-hello package and have them go from there.

    I really wish they had put in some more effort into this before announcing they support gnome. like this it looks more like they threw something together so they could boast about it than actually being committed to providing the best solution for GNOME development.

  • For "code insight", you could try KDE Studio [sourceforge.net], although that requires KDE2 and isn't quite as stable.
    --
  • I do use Kdevelop to code my End-of-studies project.

    I use it not really because I like KDE (and, I even used to _hate_ KDE, but I'm getting older and wiser :)), but because it is a good way to quickly build a friendly user interface and even any C++ application. Kdevelop builds itself a very good base to your project, with all the autoconf / automake stuff, very handly. Finding errors at compile time just by clicking on the faulty line and a few others things are really great in Kdevelop. (Please do not answer that Emacs does it).
    And my developing environment is Kdevelop + AfterStep 1.0.

    And.... If you do not like KDE, Kdevelop 1.2 supports GNOME !

  • Re:License issues? (Score:4)

    by GeZ117 ( 162744 ) on Thursday May 04, 2000 @01:05AM (#1093418)

    Uh oh. Sometimes ago, Debian's specialist is pointless arguing found out that the GPL was incompatible with Qt Free Edition License of the 1.X branch of Qt. They say that prevent them from distributing KDE, but that it prevent noone from using it. The explanation is (or was?) somewhere on Debian's site.

    Aware of the problem, TrollTech's guys have decided to publish their next release under an Open Source License, which was the QPL. This was meant to suppress incompatibility problem with the GPL, for example. So the QPL must be considered compatible with the GPL, else the Trolls would have totally miss the point.

    And furthermore, this so-called incompatibility is workable around by giving the permission of linking with Qt one's GPLed project. It was so obvious for KDE coders that their code is linkable against Qt that this permission was given implicitely, rather than explicitely. Thus Debian's arguing. If that really bug you to not have an explicit permission, edit the copyright notice of the program to add it. No one will hurt you to do so if it stays on your disk, and everyone will be happy.

  • > It's like driving a car, you just get in the
    > thing and put your foot down. Do you care what
    > makes it work underneath?

    But wouldn't you learn how to drive a stick if it would give you a 10% better milage?

  • So, why flame KDevelop? It won't prevent you to work as you like, and it will surely won't prevent you from using gcc/gmake/bash/grep

    KDevelop seems like a nice application very similar to VC++. It still leaves the original question of how many UNIX developers are using it for development. I would guess that outside of KDE application developers, very few. UNIX developers tend to be very stubborn about what tools they use. Usually a general unhapiness with other OSs led them to the cult of UNIX, so I don't think it's likely they would use such a Windows like tool for development. Personally I'm a emacs/vi/xterm/blackbox guy, for what it's worth.

  • Re:License issues? (Score:3)

    by ruud ( 7631 ) on Thursday May 04, 2000 @03:27AM (#1093421) Homepage

    Can you actually point to a phrase in the GPL that could prohibit an end user from dynamically linking (via ld.so or some other mechanism) a GPL app to a QPL library?

    Indeed, the GPL does not prohibit use, but it does prohibit distribution if the license terms are not met (in this case distribution of modified versions, which is disallowed by the QPL). Please take a look at section 3:

    For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable.

    Certainly, shared libraries fall under that clause.


    --
  • This is mostly subjective and caused by my running at a low resolution, but I really hate the fact that the menubar, titlebar, toolbar, taskbar and launchbar take so much space, and all the frames on KDevelop really reduces the amount of space you have to work in. VC++ does at least let you move these around but kdevelop doesn't.

    There's other little things like cryptic key combinations (Why is alt+f4 close window?)

    Then there's the little things like not all applications expect people to customize their colours, so widgets are sometimes surrounded by a grey box.

    I know these aren't really major problems for most people, but I don't see why a total clone of Windows is needed.

  • What? KDE looks like Microsoft Software? You mean it has a taskbar? Icons? Menu bars? Toolbars? Pushbuttons? Elements which are part of nearly every desktop environment? Grow up!

    Please remember that Gnome can be configured to look like Microsoft Windows as well.

    I've said this here a thousand times. If you come from CDE you think that KDE is a lot like CDE. If you come from windows, it feels like windows. That tells me that the KDE folks have done their job -- makeing the user feel at home.


    -- Thrakkerzog
  • set shiftwidth=3
    set expandtab

    Tabs are evil, except maybe in Makefiles. They should fix that though. After those two (my tabstop is still set to 8), tabs are converted to three spaces. To do a real tab, when needed, ctrl-v tab.

  • Re:As an aspiring open source contributor (Score:4)

    by Otter ( 3800 ) on Thursday May 04, 2000 @05:02AM (#1093425) Journal
    I'll loudly second this. I'll let others argue with the guy above as to whether professionals should use it, but as somebody who can read C/C++ but had never really written any, who can tweak a Makefile but could never write one by hand, Qt, kdelibs and KDevelop have been a blessing.

    People can complain that I'm doing the things the "wrong" way, but the fact is that I've written some apps which I needed and which enable me to use Linux that much more of the time. Those tools allow me to give something back and to provide software that hundreds of other people apparently found useful as well.
  • Can you give us an example of any of the bad bits you talk about?
    -- Thrakkerzog

  • I looked at kDevelop when it was 1.0/1.1. At that time the biggest reason that I didn't use it was that it was not possible to have source files in your project, and leave them "in place". It always forced you to move files around, and didn't play well with existing development projects.

    For example, I want to use it at work, but we have our own directory structure, a build system that works well for us, etc... But since you have to move files into a kDevelop project, I can't use it to work on existing projects.

    Has this changed? Until this happens, I will be sticking to ctags and emacs. :)

  • Losing functionality because you have a smaller screen is expected. :)

    KDE2 has a windowmanager style for laptop owners/people with small resolutions. The title bar is not very tall, and there is an oversized resize handle on the bottom right of the window.


    -- Thrakkerzog
  • I would (and do). But given the fact that around 50% (number made up off the top of my head based on general observation) drive automatics, I think the answer to your question is pretty obvious...

    --
    It's a fine line between trolling and karma-whoring... and I think I just crossed it.
    - Sean

  • When it works it is amazing, saves tons of work if one uses qt but .... version 1.0 had annoying habit of crashing whenever one ventured outside most common tasks. I will stick with SlickEdit for time being and take another look at Kdevelop in about 6 months.
  • so the hell what if it looks like microsoft's software??? WHY DOES THAT MAKE IT AUTOMATICALLY NOT GOOD??? this constant obsession-bitching-bickering about so-and-so's software, my toolkit's better than yours (cause i can pixmap my scrollbar...) and my FREE OPEN SOURCE LICENSE is NOT GOOD ENOUGH because a COMPANY made it... is just depressing.

    linux is about FREEDOM, the very same principle that the free-er-than-thou crowd believe they are touting. you are SO HARDCORE to use all those 'standard UNIX things'...congratulations. this 'i write emacs extensions in assembly'-attitude is just pathetic. i LIKE KDE. i LIKE gnome. do you want to tell me these projects suck because they have ripped stuff off microsoft???

    UNIX could learn a few things from microsoft about interfaces besides. no honest person can tell me that microsoft has not created a single good product or highly-intuitive GUI. i deny anyone to tell me that office does not kick arse. when is UNIX going to realise that 'team effort' does not equate to 'not microsoft'?

    to those who write the software we use, i thank you. you are doing an AMAZING job and the whole world is watching us.

    a good artist borrows; a great artist steals. don't kid yourself that microsoft does not have some things that are worth stealing. where do you think they got it from?

    disillusioned but hopeful.
  • Actually, _all_ developers tend to be very stubborn about what tools they use. I come from VC++, and I am very stubborn about NOT learning emacs and make. Writing the code provides enough challenges by itself, I don't need the What Was The Keystroke game on top of that...

    Now only if they could hide make a bit deeper...
  • find file dialog

    tabbed dialog boxes

    KDE is a fine project, v.wortht I'm not knocking it but it did make me groan when I started using it for some of the stuff.

    Interface Hall of Shame :
    http://www.iarchitect.com/shame.htm


    .oO0Oo.
  • I played around with KDevelop 1.1 and had somegood experiences. But I also had one *very* frustrating experience:
    I set up a widget using the widget-editor (or whatever i's called) and added a few components. Lateron I decided to add more and just did it by hand. Then I started coding some function - unfortunately I was stupid enough to add all those functions into the widget_data file. I know, stupid. Shouldn't have done it.
    But anyway, so later I have about 5000 lines of code (again, I _know_ it was stupid to put everything in one file - but I'm still learning), and I want to check out the widgets again and open the wdiget-editor. I don't make any changes. But when I close the editor, it overrides the changes I made by hand earlier and overrides the file widget_data. All my code is lost. I'm pissed.
    I posted this story into a NG and was (of coruse) laughed at for putting all the code into one file, but alsosomebody from the Kdevelop-team mentioned that this was behaviour was pointed out somewhere.
    But IMHO it needs to be pointed out more clearly.

    Another feature I'm *really* missing is automatic bracket-checking, as I'm used to from emacs or vim. In Kdevelop you can enable "auto brackets" or something like that, but this just creates the closing bracket whenever you open one. What I want is *checking* - so that it verifies if the bracket is in place and which one it closes.

    Also, I wish the indention would work as in xemacs, automatically verifying where it's supposed to indent to - this way you can find lots of parsing-errors.

    What I really like about Kdevelop is the creation of makefiles and configure scripts. Since I'm new to programming KDE/Qt, and am not too makefile-savvy, I really appreciate this.

    I'm not sure if they work 100%, though. I tried to port my (incomplete) app to another machine that has KDE and Qt libraries installed, and the configure script creates a Makefile, but with the wrong includes (ie the include paths as they are on my local machine).

    Anyway, I just downloaded and installed Kdevelop 1.2 and I can't really tell a big difference after fiddling around for 10 minutes. It nicely detected my last opened project and all looks just like the 1.1 version.

    All in all, I think it's a great product, which could be improved with the, IMHO, essential features mentioned above.

    Just my $.02

    -Jan
  • I am. You can click on a function in the function list and it brings you right to it in the source code. I don't know if emacs can do that, but it is sure sweet.

    KDevelop is the best development suite for Unix I have seen having tried just about all of them except for emacs, which has a learning curve...

    I can program with vi, gcc, and gmake, but I prefer not to. Why use a handsaw when you have a chainsaw?

    CleverFox
  • not obvious really

    europeans drive more manual shift cars than autos

    why?

    because that's what manufacturers make

    I don't think it's as fundamental as a intellectual difference between Europeans and Americans it's just the dominant paradigm and it's domination is from being adopted early like M$ really when the choice was between MS-Dos, IBM-Dos and DR-Dos the best didn't win. The paradigm shifted to Windows and here we are coping with the result.

    The best doesn't rise to the surface the most bouyant does and scum floats too.

    Not that I'm criticising either of you but I think your debate is false because you are both really saying the same thing - choice is good but I'll stick with my way thanks.
    .oO0Oo.
  • I do. While I can use gcc on the command line, and I love my bash shell, I have found that KDevelop can easily cut my development time in half. man was great fifteen years ago, but the QT and KDE docs, and the documentation browser itself in KDevelop is just incredible. The class browser and hierarchy viewer make jumping to sections of code a hell of a lot easier. The built in debugging is SO MUCH BETTER than DDD or GDB.

    However, it's got faults. The editor pretty much SUCKS, but I do like the sytax-highlighting, but the tabbing and such is pretty bad.

    Keep this in mind, just because it looks is DevStudio doesn't mean it's bad. Take off the blinders there, and keep this in mind as well - there's a generation of programmers out there that just love IDEs, get used to it.

  • Well, it can if you can code. :) I use to program in ONLY vi, with a bash shell and gcc/g++ Then I decided to try kwrite (the editor for kdevelop that some of you are bitching about) and I liked it's syntax highlighting and multiple/vertical/persistent selections stuff. Then I decided to give kdevelop a shot and soon was doing all of my assignments in kdevelop. My friend and I did our final project in kdevelop too. If you use the dialogs for adding methods and classes and remember to put in the comments at that time (and of course you can code well) it produces nice looking code and also easily (with one click) produces nicely done api documentation in html.

    These little things (and of course like I said good coding) earned us 26 out of 20 on our final project. In fact the marker was so impressed with the api documentation and our good coding that he forwarded the project to the professor and recommended that the professor take a look personally.

    So if you can code and know how to use the few little convieniences that kdevelop provides it can even help your grades! Doing that api documentation by hand would have been a real bitch and waste of time in my opinion.

    On the "it looks like microsoft" front, I honestly don't remember what visual studio looks like but who cares? MS does do some things right I mean just because we hate them it doesn't mean that they have stupid people working for them; and one thing that they do do well is user interfaces. (well most of the time anyways. Their latest efforts are questionable i.e. office2000)

    [for the flamers and trolls on this thread]
    Oh yeah, learn to use something and use it well before you criticise it. Especially when it is open source and the result of someone elses hard and FREE work. You don't have to like it but don't slam it, especially without knowing it WELL. Come on guys lets act like professionals.

    ********************************************
    Superstition is a word the ignorant use to describe their ignorance. -Sifu

  • KDE is great! (Score:2)

    by Anonymous Coward

    IMHO KDE is the way of the future for the Linux desktop. It combines elegence and style with usability, and has got a great team of developers who understand what it takes to make Linux successful - a user interface that any Windows user would feel at home with.

    The fact of the matter is that 99% of computer users are familiar with the concepts and ideas of the Windows desktop, and the last thing they want to learn is how to use a different GUI. So by making a Linux desktop that is just like the Windows one, the KDE team is doing more for the success of Linux than pracically any other project on the market, with the possible exception of the Wine project.

    What Linux needs is to be more like Windows from the perspective of the average user. They don't want to know about the workings of the kernel and filesystem to be able to use an operating system, they simply want the superb ease of use that Windows has delivered to so many people, and KDE looks set to deliver as well. In many ways Linux needs to take a leaf out of Microsoft's book - the complexity of the OS needs to be well hidden from the average user, and a common theme needs to prevail across applications.

    Anyway, once again, well done to KDE for working towards the success of Linux!

  • According to this page [uni-potsdam.de], kdevelop is licensed under the GPL. However, the GPL is not compatible with the QPL [trolltech.com], under which Qt is licensed.

    Or did the kdevelop authors put in an exception clause which they did not document on their web page?
    --

  • To me, it's obvious how striking a resemblence KDE bears to M$'s software (in looks anyway) - go ahead, flame! At my work we use Solaris, gmake, gcc, the sun compiler, emacs, tcsh, windowmaker, twm - standard UNIX things.. this is the way development under UNIX has happened and (should?) happen. Question: Who here is using KDevelop at work for production?
  • Ever notice how the freshmeatisms seem to come in batches? I think the last kernel revision story came the same day as a KDevelop revision story too.
  • Well, there's nothing wrong with pinching the good bits from MS stuff. Unfortunately KDE does seem to have a habit of pinching the bad bits as well.
  • > I don't have a big problem with it as long as I can still choose to use emacs/gcc/gmake/bash/grep,

    So, why flame KDevelop ? It won't prevent you to work as you like, and it will surely won't prevent you from using gcc/gmake/bash/grep 'cause it use it also. And autoconf/automake, SGMLtools, etc also.
    KDevelop is a front-end to all these unix tools, and manage all scriptable-task itself. 'Twas intented to allow a coder to code without messing with details of project management (Makefiles, configure scripts, CVS, etc) and use all traditionnal Unix-tools transparently. Except Emacs, but there are peoples trying to include it as the standard editor.

    There is, however, an IDE using Qt and which will bring its own tools. It's codenamed Kylix and it's not from KDE-folks but from Corel [corel.com]-Inprise/Borland [inprise.com].

  • Re:Who here is using KDevelop at work for producti (Score:4)

    by Psiren ( 6145 ) on Thursday May 04, 2000 @12:26AM (#1093445)
    this is the way development under UNIX has happened and (should?) happen.

    I don't think forcing people to develop software in a particular way is good for open source. If someone wishes to use a devlopment environment like KDevelop, who are we to say they shouldn't? It's not something I would currently use, but that doesn't mean others shouldn't.

    I'm curious why you think forcing an environment on someone is a good idea. Isn't that what Microsoft have done, and what half of the open source community is actively fighting against?

    Now weary traveller, rest your head. For just like me, you're utterly dead.
  • Can you actually point to a phrase in the GPL that could prohibit an end user from dynamically linking (via ld.so or some other mechanism) a GPL app to a QPL library?

    It's not as if they're distributiong staticly linked binarys. Those would be illegal.
  • ..

    KDevelop has made it very easy to make the transition from Windows to Linux. I have a few personal projects that I am working on and am very excited to have tools that make it easier to contribute to the open source movement.

    I am very anxious for them to get the CodeInsight features that MS VS 6.0 and a lot of the Java IDE's have. I have read on the message board that will eventually be a comming feature.

    On that note, does anyone else know if there is a C++ editor/IDE that does have a insight feature that is open source?

    Cheers
  • One striking similarity is that the editor in MS Visual Studio is next to worthless and the KDevelop editor emulates that nicely :-)

    Seriously, the editor is no good compared to emacs. An option to use an external emacs as an editor is what I would put on top of my feature request list. Maybe I should try to hack it in myself, now there is a thought...

  • > the FSF still hasn't approved the QPL as a real OSS license?
    Oh, dear. The Free Software Foundation deal with Free Software. They dislike OSS as watered-down, bastardized version of Free Software. They has never approved anything as OSS, and they will never do: it's not their role.
    Oh, and I just look on FSF's comment about various licenses [gnu.org] and they say: [the QPL] is a non-copyleft free software license incompatible with the GNU GPL [except if you] resolve the conflict [...] by adding a notice like this to it:
    As a special exception, you have permission to link this program with the Qt library and distribute executables, as long as you follow the requirements of the GNU GPL in regard to all of the software in the executable aside from Qt     .
    They say it's a Free Software license. So the dude's point is non applicable.
    Furthermore, saying "Qt is evil" is trolling, or flaming, or just displaying stupidity in public, but not debating.
  • Was this a troll?

Slashdot Top Deals

The system was down for backups from 5am to 10am last Saturday.

Close