Slashdot Log In
Bero Quits Red Hat Over Treatment of KDE
Posted by
chrisd
on Wed Sep 25, 2002 04:43 PM
from the shades-of-raster dept.
from the shades-of-raster dept.
Vicegrip writes "In an article on leaked release notes on Redhat 8.0 CNet also revealed that Bernhard Rosenkraenzer, known here on Slashdot as berorh, has quit over objections he has on what Redhat is doing to KDE in the new release. Bero says that the new version of KDE in Redhat 8.0 is going to be crippleware.
I know I always found Bero's comments here on Slashdot helpful and insightful. His worries about what Redhat is doing to KDE for 8.0 have me rather concerned and thinking of switching distributions."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Bero Quits Red Hat Over Treatment of KDE
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 615 comments
(Spill at 50!) | Index Only
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
|
2
Maybe he will join MandrakeSoft again! (Score:5, Interesting)
I am with Red Hat on this one... (Score:4, Insightful)
I am one of those who say that Red Hat should only support either Gnome *or* KDE, but allow through the libraries to run each other's applications, in a way that it is completely unified (apps to behave and look the same even if they are from different toolkits).
More discussion about this here:
http://www.osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=1808 [osnews.com]
Re:Bollax (Score:4, Insightful)
Asserting tht RedHat is trying to "neutralize" KDE is attributing political motives to their actions. Instead, I think, they're simply trying to sell more copies of RedHat Linux.
Re:Bollax (Score:4, Insightful)
Ehm, this must be a matter of opinion, since I believe KDE to be putting out better quality applications (in a shorter timespan too, they are not losing their head-start, they are increasing their lead). As for "political stunts", consider this: when I think of GNOME, I think of Ximian and Eazel (the millions wasted, the strange Google ads). When I think of KDE, I think of a team of developers "getting shit done." About the only bad mark that KDE has ever had was with the old Qt licensing, which all boiled down to wanting to "get shit done" instead of worrying about licensing. If you want to talk about politics, talk about GNOME.
Maybe if they had been developing instead of throwing tantrums their applications would be the ones Red Hat had chosen instead.
Red Hat chose GNOME way back in the day, as far as Linux desktops are concerned. KDE wasn't all that great back then, and GNOME was fully GPL. I think the licensing had to do more with their decision than quality of applications (especially considering that GNOME at that time was awful). Of course, it is harder to turn back now that Red Hat promoted GNOME so much. Considering that Red Hat is the only major distribution shipping GNOME as the default desktop, I wonder if Red Hat could end the desktop war by simply switching to KDE as default? Something to think about...
It is also important to remember that the people debating this are people like you and I, not the actual core KDE developers (or GNOME developers for that matter). They are not throwing tantrums, they are coding. I'd even guess that most of them don't even have Slashdot accounts. KDE continues to have a very strong developer community that generally does not worry about things like this. Please place blame appropriately.
Re:Bollax (Score:4, Insightful)
Just the fact that RedHat and Sun both agree that GNOME is a better desktop should say a lot. Besides, even if KDE was just as good as GNOME, GNOME would still have quite a lead, as most apps are based on GTK. Loading and maintaining twice as many toolkits and libraries is a waste of system resources, and effort.
Re:I am with Red Hat on this one... (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, I'm planning on waiting for the imminent release, rather than the "null" work in progress, having a play around with it and then making up my mind. There is so much FUD on this issue from the KDE and Gnome developers, as well as Red Hat and the community that this is the *only* way to go.
As a firm KDE desktop user who runs a lot of Gnome apps within it I'm all for making KDE and Gnome look alike for a consistent desktop. I've basically done this so far by using very similar themes on both window managers and tweaking out the differences where possible, and it was my impression that Red Hat had just taken this one stage futher, which was fine by me. However, for Bero to take this step, especially given that this is the same Bero that so eloquently dispersed the FUD around Red Hat's recent compiler choices, I'm getting a little concerned they may have gone a bit futher than that.
Red Hat has an excellent track record for me; I've had problems with most of the the other popular choices that Red Hat didn't even bat an eyelid at. They are also pretty on the ball with the security patches, unlike some distros I could mention, which is essential when you are responsible for numerous boxes out on the Internet.
All in all, I do hope they are not going to spoil their track record over this, but a large part of using open source code is about having the freedom to make a choice, isn't it? I don't see any reason why that shouldn't extend to the distro packagers too, and frankly I think it somewhat hypocritical to believe otherwise.
amen to that (Score:4, Insightful)
(for the KDE lovers out there, I find Gnome just about as annoying and "more unintegrated"
Amen (Score:5, Interesting)
KDE people whining about this are going to be ignored. The GNOME people have accepted the loss of their icons without throwing fits, though it certainly changes RH GNOME's "look and feel". I can't figure out why the KDE people can't do the same for the changes that affected their "look and feel."
Re:Amen (Score:4, Informative)
RedHat should have given the user a choice at least. If the user installed KDE (not default), then by gosh, they probably wanted to run KDE.
Re:Amen (Score:4, Insightful)
This is little more than an elaborate theme and a default set of applications.
It has nothing to do with "slowing down" KDE or "removing choice". It has to do with delivering a common user experience across both desktops.
If you don't like it, don't use it!
If you don't like it, and have to use it, change the config to something YOU can live with.
I don't get what the hell is so hard to understand about this relatively straightforward concept.
Re:I am with Red Hat on this one... (Score:5, Insightful)
It is a common misconception in these discussions that people are mad about the unified look and integration between KDE and GNOME that Red Hat is promoting. Nothing could be further from the truth, and I hope I can speak for all KDE fans when I say the unified look is a step forward, and integration is good. After all, people have been crying out for both for years. But what Red Hat is including is not KDE, it is simply KDE's panel used to launch other applications. The panel is not what makes KDE compelling, it's the app integration. If Red Hat wants to use GNOME app defaults, then what are they doing including KDE at all? It is a joke, simply so they can put "KDE desktop" on their boxes.
I am also not trying to say that Red Hat should drop all KDE support. No matter what, Red Hat should include libraries to run KDE apps, and I don't think anyone would argue otherwise. If they aren't going to use KDE app defaults, though, they might as well not include KDE as a choice on the login screen. There is no reason to.
Re:what exactlly are they doing? (Score:5, Insightful)
AFAIK, it is the case. RedHat's trying to do something for people who aren't emotionally involved with either KDE or Gnome -- make a consistent, usable desktop. I think this is a good thing to do. KDE and Gnome are working together these days (see freedesktop.org). This is encouragement from RedHat to make KDE and Gnome more interoperable. If they don't interoperate, then there make as well be two entirely separate types of desktop linux -- KDE linux and Gnome Linux. Vendors would need to pick one (or both) to support.
Macs have a default interface. Windows has a default interface. Linux systems should as well. Note that you can run QT programs on Windows and MacOS -- similarly, you can use the toolkit of your own choice on a Linux system. But having a default desktop system would be a good thing for Linux in the desktop arena.
I wish (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I wish (Score:4, Insightful)
As for me, personally I am curious and interested to see what RH has done with the desktop in v8, and don't feel too strongly about the KDE/GNOME/Bluecurve arguments -- and I don't know enough about whether I should agree with Bero's statements about crippling KDE.
-=Ivan
"free" software (Score:5, Insightful)
Real free software people would be against (or at least oblivious) to the branding in the first place.
Re:"free" software (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:"free" software (MOD PARENT UP) (Score:5, Insightful)
It's like people have confused 'freedom' with 'freedom do you whatever the hell you want without actually being subjected to what other people _think_ of it'. Which is a shame, because peer discussion and judgement is about the most important check/balance in society. While we try and limit the actions that can result from peer judgement (to avoid mob justice, for instance), we should try and avoid attempting to squash criticism just because its not 'productive'
When people are free to do crap, don't forget others are well within their rights to freedom to voice dissatisfaction
Re:"free" software (Score:4, Interesting)
The rhetoric being levelled at Red Hat from the KDE zealots goes way beyond mere criticism.
Re:"free" software (Score:5, Insightful)
Real free software people wouldn't be emotionally offended by others taking advantage of their own freedoms to modify the software. RedHat is doing what the GPL allows. This is what it's all about, guys -- freedom with the software you use, develop with and distribute.
Re:"free" software (Score:5, Insightful)
Okay, so if I use your XSLTFilter on a Web site that displays XML-indexed goatse pictures, you'll suddenly become convinced they're the most attractive thing you've ever seen?
There's a deep divide between toleration and approval. As I understand it, RMS (for one) is generally speaking opposed to war. However, the GPL under which he releases his software contains no provisions preventing militaries from using it in the development and deployment of weapons systems. RMS tolerates the use of glibc in weapons -- that is to say, he doesn't try to stop it. That doesn't mean he approves of it, or wouldn't be offended by the thought of a missile guided by glibc-linked code blowing up a village in Iraq. (Hell, I'm offended by it, and I didn't even write glibc.)
The confusion between toleration and approval (or between taking offense and being intolerant) is a dangerous one, like the confusion so many people have between criticism and censorship. It is destructive of public discourse, because it leads people to react emotionally as if they were being threatened with force, when in fact they are merely being told someone's opinion.
Re:"free" software (Score:4, Insightful)
Yup, they're silly buggers, no question there.
But I don't think it's valuable to call them "fake free software people", or whatever the antonym of your "real free software people" upthread was supposed to be. I don't even know what a "free software person" is meant to be in that context -- an advocate? user? developer? We have clear criteria for what makes a program Free Software but we do not have criteria for what makes a "free software person."
I find it disturbing sometimes how much resentment there can be in the community. Whenever one of these atrocious flamewars breaks out, it seems to me that it's more because people are looking for a fight, looking for some battle line on whose sides they can form up. Quite often, it seems it's the resentful impulse that was once called levelling that serves as the impulse for this. Levelling is the harmful side of envy: instead of raising yourself up to the level of the envied one, you knock them down to yours.
Many free-software users hate Microsoft, because they observe that Microsoft has done wrong and profited by it -- but a sizable minority envy Red Hat, because while Red Hat has done no wrong it has profited where others have failed. None in this matter of KDE in Red Hat 8.0 have presented a coherent argument that Red Hat has done wrong; rather, they have seized on something unusual that Red Hat has done and unfoundedly declared it wrong, as a justification for knocking down Red Hat.
It's foolish, and in the end it drags everyone down. The negative publicity hurts Red Hat directly and the rest of Free Software/Open Source by association. The attitude of intolerance towards modifications -- that if I want to modify your code I need your explicit permission -- creates a contradiction with the operating principles of FS/OSS and works to deprive us of its benefits. The inherent ugliness and acrimony of unnecessary hostility hurts us all.
Re:"free" software (Score:4, Informative)
Anyone who's used the 8.0 beta can tell you they're enhancing their usability, nmot their brand with their changes. The grab bag of different applications, inconsistent themes, and desktop specific panel apps are there if you want them. But Red Hat have made themes and panel apps consistent by default and put what they consider the best apps forward by outting them on the quick launch area of the taskbar. Its no big deal, and Red Hat 8.0s KDE runs every KDE app I've built and packaged for it.
Crippleware? (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyone who's used it likes it. (Score:5, Informative)
Red Hat have:
Re:Anyone who's used it likes it. (Score:4, Informative)
> release:
But not an informed one. You left a lot out, in addition to putting the RH spin on what you included. RH has also:
- Added lots of buggy Xft stuff to QT
- Buggy changes to support vfolder
- Broke service name compatibility
- Broke plugin handling
The gruesome details are all in bugzilla.
These are off the top of my head, I've probably left some out.
Re:Anyone who's used it likes it. (Score:5, Interesting)
Since KDE has never released a proper announcement of what their issues with Red Hat beyond some generally false stuff in their forums (cheers Mosfet) and as an extensive KDE user I haven't encountered them, I may indeed not know everything.
I didn't put a RH spin on anything. Users should pick the best apps. RH aren't trying to turn KDE into Gnome - 2 of 3 non KDE their `best apps' aren't Gnome apps either. And Konq, KMail etc still work (apart from the plugin bug you mentioned). I'm a Konq fan, but at the end of the day, Mozilla can render more pages (such as www.ninemsn.com.au, the most popular site in the country) and Konq can't. And as I said, every KDE app I've rebuilt for Null has been fine.
The Xft additions seem to work well enough that I haven't noticed them negatively at all - just that for once I got Xfthack quality font rendering out of the box on a Linux distro without having to screw around. This is a good thing. I don't know what's buggy about it and when I do notice something, I spend a bit of time in Bugzilla reporting it or checking it out.
Konqueror plugisn are broken, huh? Flash works fine on www.xdude.com works fine (using the Flash 6 beta under Konqueror on the current Null). Quicktime / Crossover also work fine, albeit a little slowly than I'd like. But I accept there are likely remaining bugs in Konq plugins, as Macromedia.com doesn't work properly, and last time I looked its also in Mozilla marked for RH to fix, along with the latest Nautilus fuckups. How is this malicious? What have Red Hat done to deliberately break it? And why would they deliberately break it if they're going to fix it? You haven't said so I'll treat RH as innocent until proven guilty.
I don't know about what applications vfolders you're talking about, or what `service names are'. Care to tell or give us a bugzilla link?
Using GCC3 does not equate to sabotage. (Score:4, Interesting)
- Broke plugin handling
The gruesome details are all in bugzilla.
If I'm uninformed, then you sir, are a liar. Read the actual bug report [redhat.com] sometime. Red Hat have done nothign of the sort - they've just compiled KDE with the current GCC - Macromedia has yet to release a GCC 3 based Flash (tho it would seem Flash 6 corrects the problem). You're trying to make out that Red Hat have deliberately sabotages KDE plugins. When Suse, Mandrake, and every other distro also compile KDE with GCC3, will you accuse them of the same?
With Redhat on this one... (Score:5, Insightful)
This IS the way to better software . . . (Score:4, Insightful)
I must disagree with this. I think strong principles are a great virtue of the open source community. Instead of being less productive at a KDEless Redhat, Bero will be more productive somewhere else. This doesn't say anything bad about Redhat or Bero and only further supports the diversification (and competition) of the community.
I am sure that the majority of MS employees would not walk out if suddenly MS decided to do something as drastic as go Open Source. You may call this corporate strength, but I call it 40,000 "yes" men (and women) who don't give a fsck what their company does, as long as that paycheck comes on Friday.
He should change his name ... (Score:5, Funny)
It's rather sad. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'll tell you why -- good old fashioned ego. Whereas the low end (kernel developers, compiler writers, etc.) and high end (clustering software, 3D modelling and rendering, etc.) of development is led by strong, well-organised teams of well-trained developers with vision and understanding, the middle ground of the Linux world is polluted with warring egos and silly spats like this. There are myriad competing, mutually incompatible yet separately inadequate office suites (Star Office, KOffice, Applix,...), desktop environments (KDE, Gnome, XFCE, CDE, UDE, ROX,...), and X servers (XFree86, MetroX, XiG). We can't even decide on a printing system! If all the man-hours poured into fighting over KDE and GNOME were combined into a common vision, we would have one perfect end-user desktop, instead of two poor imitations of Windows.
Don't give me the old "competition" argument either. There is only one Linux kernel, which seems to progress just fine without another competing project nipping at its feet and instigating flamewars. The endless KDE vs. GNOME, Applix vs. StarOffice, and other feuds have wasted more productivity than would be gained by and competitive drive.
I, for one, am somewhat miffed that while my operating system powers Hollywood blockbusters and NASA supercomputers, it still can't fully replace Windows on my office desktop. Linux is growing up; its users need to grow up with it, shed their egos and work towards the common goal of creating an excellent working environment.
Re:It's rather sad. (Score:5, Insightful)
When I implement rendering software, its very easy to tell if my approach or your approach is better; bench mark.
Now hell me how to objectively detemine which interface is better: KDE or GNOME?
I think its obvious that there is always going to be way more arguments about what the handles and knobs looks like than whether or not that engine is implemented in the best way possible. You can quantitatively test and compare all the kinds of software you say that doesn't suffer from the problems KDE/GNOME do
Re:Amen (Score:4, Insightful)
And what about Debian or Slack, quite arguably the two most "pure" distros of all? What gives Redhat the power to dictate the desktop environment for them?
The fact is, for most desktop developers, having Linux take over the mainstream desktop isn't the priority. It's providing the best desktop software on the planet for themselves and their users. This whole "Linux vs. The World" is just some childish notion that attempts to shoehorn people. A big part of Linux is that it is Free Software, and with that comes the freedom to choose what you want. Distros have their default desktop, but that shouldn't interfere with me in any way.
Re:It's rather sad. (Score:4, Insightful)
You missed the VM system flamewars? The scheduler fights? The CML2 flamewars starring ESR? The kernel developers are by no means an egoless hive-mind, noiselessly producing good code. Read kernel-traffic [zork.net] for a little taste, or delve into the linux-kernel list raw & unfiltered for more than you evidently expect in the way of competition.
If you want to look for "Not Invented Here" mentalities and competition between kernel projects in the free-software world, consider also Linux vs. BSD. As I understand it, there's no reason that OpenBSD's pf firewall module -- which has some serious advantages over Linux's netfilter -- could not be integrated with the Linux network stack. It hasn't been, though, and I don't imagine it will be.
Kernels can be fighty places, too.
Re:It's rather sad. (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you're mistaken in assuming that computationally enormous is equivalent to hard. Designing and optimizing a Unix-ish operating system is a solved problem. It's been done well for decades by some really smart, well-funded people and there's plenty of experience and available source to draw on.
The desktop is hard. Apple and Microsoft still haven't gotten it down pat and the CDE guys completely failed at it. I remember a few years ago the attitude was, "We have graphics toolkits, and we've made Windows-like desktops with icons and toolbars. Thanks to the power of open source, we'll have Mac/Windows quality desktop apps in two years!" (I'm quoting the royal "we" of Linux enthusiasts.) It turns out that it's a lot harder than that, and that the devs at Apple and Microsoft and Adobe are a lot smarter and more innovative than a lot of the Linux xealots gave them credit for.
Re:It's rather sad. (Score:4, Interesting)
For math papers, OpenOffice works *better* than the MS equivalent, and for many tasks, makes more sense than using Maple or Mathematica. And Open Office is wonderful for writing in French, or any other Western language.
When other people say "The Desktop" they're not talking about work, they're talking about Entertainment. And there are real shackles, very high barriers to entry in that arena, that have nothing to do with one piece of free software versus another, and everything to do with the hostility of hardware makers and industry associations!
But that's the "desktop" as an entertainment venue, and not as a workplace. Becaus