On Fri, 1 Oct 2010 08:35:45 -0400, you wrote: >The user has to tolerate some change. We can't cater to people who >never upgrade which seems to be what is taking place. Especially with >the fact that our end of life happens sooner, users must already >expect a constant stream of updates. Yes, running a Linux distribution like Fedora involves change - but that change can be made manageable by only requiring disruptive changes every 6 months (if the user follows each release) or 12 months if the user is alternating releases. >If they want more stability they >should be using RHEL, CentOS or Scientific Linux, Debian Stable, >Ubuntu LTS which do put the focus on non disruptiveness. Are you really saying that a KDE user should be stuck with KDE 3.5.4 (which is what is in CentOS 5) if they want some stability? Those versions of Linux have their place, but using them on the desktop can be problematic given the rate of change in the Linux desktop environments. There is simply too much desktop software that requires newer versions of libraries than are shipped with the long term releases. Which is why a more stable Fedora is desired. >Each release of KDE comes with bug fixes, security fixes and new >features. True of most software. > Plus combine the fact that KDE right now is evolving at a >rapid rate thanks to all of the new developers that the 4.x series has >attracted. All the more reason to restrict disruptive updates to a new Fedora release. Certainly as a prospective KDE user (I have not liked the new gnome-shell the couple of times I have tried it in the past) I expect the KDE included with Fedora to allow me to do what I need to do with the least amount of disruption possible. While I appreciate new versions of software that brings new features, I don't want that to occur when I am trying to get other things done. > Not having the latest makes it difficult for a KDE >developer to test their stuff and make sure it keeps working with the >latest KDE. Fedora isn't just a home to Gnome development, which as a >framework never seems to change so they won't have the same opinion as >the KDE people. I hate to disappoint you but no distribution, and this includes rawhide, is great for bleeding edge. Like it or not but if you as a developer need the absolute latest in development version of something you need to package or otherwise compile it yourself. This is why developers working on Gnome itself use jhbuild, to automate this for them, because the distributions themselves can't do it. Given that you have researched how other distributions handle KDE, it is apparent the same is true for developers working on KDE. Look, I realise you are passionate about KDE, and want the best KDE experience in Fedora. But most people are not developers, they instead are using their desktop environment of choice to get regular, everyday things done with office software, web browsers, email, and sometime even custom software. They want predictability, which means only having to make changes to how they do things when they are prepared for the changes, which occurs when they upgrade Fedora. Thus the best KDE experience you can give them is one of stability, where KDE helps them do their work instead of being work. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
