Richard Stallman On KDE/GNOME Cooperation 411
Karma Sucks writes: "For the first time that I remember, RMS is encouraging collaboration between the GNOME and KDE projects. He offers a concrete idea: Unifying the themes between KDE and GNOME. Matthias Ettrich once went far enough to propose a default unified 'Linux' theme that both Qt and GTK+ could support."
Forget Themes: Make the Clipboards compatible (Score:5, Interesting)
Indeed a good idea but (Score:2, Interesting)
Heck even e copy from a galeon the copy paste menu way would never generate a paste in kedit!
I'm sure a user would care less about a common L&F than about a precise and normed app interoperability, which should be possible!
I want a single desktop anyway (Score:3, Interesting)
KDE is so much nicer to develop for than GNOME imho but I prefer to use GNOME, I'm sure that others have differing opinions about what they like and hate about each environment, but working together to provide maybe the ultimate desktop experiance would be brilliant!
I know this opinion is a little radical and not likely to happen, but if I had my eutopia, that would be it!
Yay! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:To Hell with RMS (Score:2, Interesting)
Yeah... I was really surprised when I clicked on the link to mail.gnome.org and saw an email.
A lot of times when you read email then there are cool videos and 3-d graphics. One time I found a live goat!
I guess open source email lists just aren't up to the standards Microsoft users are accustomed to. I mean *sheesh* email on an email list??? How old fashioned!
Well... (Score:4, Interesting)
Now that license issues are cleared up, RMS has a chance and he's gonna take it. Eliminate two, create one. This isn't a bad thing, since you STILL have the source.
We have options for customization, and a lot of freedom, but what we lack is any real consolidation (IE eliminating redundant standards), thus creating a plethora of pitfalls for software developers.
This is one thing I think the Linux Standards Base should cover. More than just one boring, rather useless "base," it should cover MANY bases, and specify standard APIs, installations, and specifications for systems/software. Hell make Linux Standard Base certification like that damn Made for Windows XX logo.
Theory:
LSB defines a desktop base, a server base, and an embedded base.
On the desktop base you have modules (not necessarily compatible), say Gaming Module which includes all necessary packages and auto-detection and config info, a Network client module that automatically loads remote config utilities and any necessary client software, and a workstation module that adds it's required things.
Same for server and embedded.
Also have the LSB supply standard definitions for the GUI APIs. Standard Themes, fonts, what have you.
If you can build a solid foundation for your system and get it under control (community control, it's still ours), then you'll attract users. I think that's a bit of what RMS is trying to do here.
Re:Forget Themes: Make the Clipboards compatible (Score:3, Interesting)
You have pinpointed the absolutely biggest strength with Windows. You will always have the same controls, things will be where you assume them to be, the clipboard will work, COM works, DirectX works, there is one win32(64) etc etc etc.
So how come diversity is bad in this case? Because it's confusing and counterproductive. It uses a lot of development time that could have been better spent on one better solution that is taken to a mature state.
If KDE/Gnome wants to make certain protocols etc comming, that's nice as long as nobody is left out. But I would never accept two desktopsystems on my computer. I'd rather see more work on KDE/QT.
If you want Linux to be sold with home computers, this is what you need:
There you go, there you have a list. A lot of the ground work is done, and some of the work is being done as I sit here and wriet. But now it just requires more work, people disagreeing, people agreeing and much much more work (see why we don't want five more GUI systems etc etc).
See it as a MacOS X killer if you want to ^_^ Heck, I wished I had time to do this myself. Guess you should mail me if you can muster a 1,000 coders, including the kernel and KDE people. Should sell it (and support people) to Compaq, HP, Dell, etc to include in their new spiffy computers. Including a DVD with all the binaries and source (eat that M$!).
Menubar (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Forget Themes: Make the Clipboards compatible (Score:5, Interesting)
model, maybe a little bit too sophisticated. Hence it has traditionally been poorly understood and badly implemented in apps and toolkit.
Gnome does the Right Thing with respect to clipboards, while QT2/KDE2 uses a more limited clipboard model. The good news is that QT3 and thereby KDE3 will do the Right Think and therefore interoperate a lot better with Gnome (as well as properly written X apps such as XEmacs)
These comments are somewhat enlighening: http://dot.kde.org/1013076354/
Also read this for a backgrounder about clipboard and X: http://www.jwz.org/doc/x-cut-and-paste.html
Why RMS applied to GNOME board (Score:4, Interesting)
Just a couple days before, he had said during a conference in Paris that his primary reason to apply to the board was to support cooperation between GNOME and KDE (see my post [slashdot.org]), eventhough it wasn't clearly stated in his answers [newsforge.com] to the GNOME board candidacy questionnaire.
I'm really happy to see that it was not only electoral bulls**t.
Maybe he is the last person you could have think of for such a task (especially knowing his position toward the KDE team in the old days of the QPL), but here he comes with this simple (as in not heavily political) practical (as in usefull) first step... so let's try !
Re:Wow (Score:4, Interesting)
Personally, I agree with you and think a standard would be a good idea. Taking a step away from rapid developement and making a single stable interface would do wonders for acceptance. Besides, you can always have easily accessible information on configuring your interface how you like it. Still though, the arguement against this is pretty obvious.
I'd probably say that the best idea would be for some group to go and dedictate a year or so to making the be-all-end-all of interfaces. Not some wierd hybrid of previous interfaces like most distros ship now, but something that is simple, elegent, etc. Other people have said it, and I'll repeat - like the OSX interface. I'm not saying it's the most efficient, but it consistently does what you intuitively expect it to do. That's what a defacto Linux "theme" would need to do. The only other option, I suppose, is just to copy Windows or OSX or another highly developed/researched interface. There simply exists nothing right now that would make sense to call the default desktop.
Better C++! (Score:5, Interesting)
(Poor guy -- he's like Alan Greenspan, where every public utterance is turned into a grand policy question.)
Re:Sounds like a good idea (Score:3, Interesting)
GNOME finally LOST (Score:1, Interesting)
hello there,
i am mainly gnome user and migrated to gnome 2 some das ago. i must say that doing this was a hard task. i dont want to sound like a troll nor do i want to rant shit but here the problems that occoured:
- you need to install nearly all programming languages available on your system only to get gnome 2 compiled. often you ask yourself 'why?'. example gnome 2 has only 1 python file that is required to get a basic gnome 2 installation. i am no python programmer nor am i interested in python but you are forced to install python to get gnome 2 compiled because that one fucking file requires it. i mean ok gnome is a programming language independant project and i respect it. but if someone wants to code python gnome applications then its ok but i dont need to install it. so the basic target of compiling gnome 2 from CVS terribly sucks, bad planned stuff.
- gnome 2 got a shitload of new libraries and modules that you need to compile its mainly a complete BREAKUP of previous gnome 1 currently the CVS looks more than a warfield than really usable, not to mention all the problems, bugs etc. and if you look at their roadmap then gnome 2 should be done middle of march, this is exactly 30 days from today on (15 Feb. 2002). i doubt and seriously i really doubt that they get a working DESKTOP done until that time. at the end there is no TESTCASE possible.
- gnome 2 development plattform SUCKS yes it suck terrible. well sounds tolling but well lemme explain.
- CVS module A requires autoconf 2.13, automake 1.3 to get the scripts set up correctly.
- CVS module B requires autoconf 2.50, automake 1.4 to get the scripts set up correctly.
- CVS module C requires autoconf 2.52, automake 1.5 to get the scripts set up correctly.
seriously well planned. not to mention that there is no single letter written in the README's or INSTALL files that at least detail the requirements correctly. no you need to play trivia with the configure.in files. not to mention that the buildscripts are so broken at the moment that a lot of autogenerated files must be made manually e.g. make gnome-mokka.h only to get the file.
now result:
if i compare the above stuff with the current CVS of KDE3 and QT3 then i must say 'well it takes some hours to compile but at least it compiles' even the testphase for kde 3 seem to be longer for me than that for gnome 2. i think that after KDE 3 comes finally out its probably the better decission for people who wants a desktop.
issue commercial companies:
attentive readers of gnome mailinglist will find out that a lot of SUN people behave like they were owners of GNOME. e.g. you get strange looking emails from them with directives and orders. example: 'we want this and we want that' sure if they pay fine for gnome then why not. same for ximian and their sick roadmap with
issue evolution:
evolution is a nice pim for gnome, probably the best on the market right now but it has a lot of issues. the new current CVS uses
gnome development community itself:
i havent see so many people on one place that carry their nose that high in the air i wonder how they still see their own road when they walk. hope none of them hit a wall by mistake. mainly patches welcome but stay out of our community. no ? you dont want to stay out ? you are a troll +b !*ruediger*@* (this is a fake ident) but as i always said pride comes before the fall.
gtk 2 matures gnome, the gimp matures gnome:
no not today but i see it comming, all these people hung out on the same channel and influences them. a lot of people dont like desktops and really get pissed by the idea that they cant use simple gtk applications anymore because of the big dependency. well oki yes.. yes... yes you can say, hum install packs i dont care but thats not the point a lot of these people are EXPERTS (well no one is really stupid if he/she decides for linux, so its no need to make people more stupid in the public as they in reality are) besides its a known and most used phrase of the gnome developers "why do you want to compile, a normal user should use RPM's or DEB's".. excuse me isnt it open source ? like SOURCECODE ? like 'i want to tweak' ? so why the fuck does some of the 'usability sun or redhat suckers' come up with that shit ? either help or shut the fuck up.
oki now some sentences to kde:
well i always eye on kde and to say the truth, 'yes kde is more usable' it is better thought, better planned and kde 3 offers programs already that you can use for daily work. look at gnome after the gnome 2 release comes out, then where are the apps ? they still needs to get ported (if not dead already) i mean i have a nice sweat desktop and a shit on it. using nautilus to watch pron pictures all the day is not what i call serious work. kde 3 comes with so many applications, more than my heart can carry. but on the otherhand kde has some sideeffects that makes me avoid using it. e.g. no 'the gimp' i dont like the idea (i am selfspeaking here) to mix widgetsets, thats what i have done 7-8 years back on linux and it made me sick. i want a unified desktop (thats the reason for a desktop) and i want unified applications. now kde offers a lot of applications. but the reason why people more and more decide to use gnome instead of kde is simple because of the gimp and because of the possiblility to hack in 'C'. at least they are my reasons. but neverthless KDE 3 will make it. now why comes that a gnome user says this. its simple because of all the applications.
now i tested gnome 2 what do i get. nothing. the same applications, same gnome utils, some ui refered changes but basically a gnome 1 desktop (nothing new) oki from the coding point of view a lot of shit changed (no doubt) but apps. where are the apps. its the same like buying a xbox with 1 game it makes no fun so i better go for the old well known playstation 2 with 200 games. its simple. not only that kde 3 has a longer roadmap, no there are already so many applications available for it because a lot of people had the time porting it.
you guys on KDE dont need to worry, gnome may become good but it never touches KDE you guys dont only offer KDE on the release day, you also know that people get the applications for it. unfortunately its not the case for GNOME.
as a last sentence, let me tell you (only to clarify the facts) that there is no BROWSER and no MAILCLIENT for GNOME 2. you probably need to sideinstall GNOME 1 to get all your lovely tools operating, but then you must ask yourself WHY ? in this case you better stay on your GNOME 1. i for myself wait until the bitter end of GNOME 2 development until it gets released on 29 MARCH (who ever wants to belive that) and decide then FINAL KDE 3 and FINAL GNOME 2 but from what i can tell now GNOME 2 is somewhere between KDE 1 and KDE 2 but no way compareable to KDE 3. with other words, as it looks now it FINALLY lost.
Re:Forget Themes: Make the Clipboards compatible (Score:3, Interesting)
Why do you write code? (Score:2, Interesting)
Uraeus linuxrising org:
> And as the free software saying goes,
> a itch that don't itch a developer,
> doesn't get scratched.
RMS:
That was said by Eric Raymond who belongs to another movement, and it reflects the spirit of that movement. The spirit of the free software movement is to do projects because they are important for the community and for our freedom. They don't have to "scratch an itch".
Is this really an accurate portrayal of (one of) the differences between "open source" and FSF sanctioned free software? Open source developers are out to do what's best for themselves (and maybe helping out others as a by-product by releasing their code), while free software developers are motivated only by love of their fellow (hu)man. I'm not really heavily involved in either development community, and didn't realize that there was such a sharp divide (if it actually exists outside of RMS head). Can some free software/open source developer types weigh in on this? Why do you write code?
We Had To (Score:3, Interesting)
The attacks were vehement, nasty and for the most part unwarranted. I never saw KDE as a "threat" and considering it a threat did nothing but waste a lot of energy (IMHO). Especially considering where the software was headed and the fact that EVERYONE KNEW that QT would have an open source license eventually.
While I endorse the idea of some interoperability I tend to take a step back and look for other motives. Members of the KDE team have long tried to get some interoperability between the 2 desktops and were repeatedly rebuffed. It's a nice idea, but considering some of the mudslinging thats gone on over the past few years, I'm with holding judgment.
Hopefully the axe is buried, considering there are some admin's out there running open relays because it was the right thing to do in 1990, I expect to see it dug up a few more times. That's the problem with religious wars where you unfairly vilify the enemy it makes it hard to work with them when they are on your side. I'm glad some people are starting to consider the big picture.