On Thursday, May 09, 2013 08:32:10 PM James Tyrer wrote:
> On 05/07/2013 02:40 PM, Ross Boylan wrote:
> > I too am finding the reliability of KDE and its apps not what I would
> > like, but one thing puzzles me about this complaint, the statement that
> > bug fixing is not welcomed...
> >
> > On Tuesday, May 07, 2013 02:54:19 AM James Tyrer wrote:
> >> The KDE development team appears to be interested in something other
> >> than producing a stable release. It really is that simple. As a
> >> result, the release process is not oriented towards producing a stable
> >> release.
> >
> > I'm not sure if the developers would agree, though most developers would
> > rather make new things than fix old ones. They are supposedly fixing
> > lots of bugs with each release; it's just there are so many.
>
> I have to, possibly, correct you here, and this is indicative of the
> problem. Is the tally of bugs fixed or of bugs closed?
I understand that you and others ran into problems that were sufficiently
serious and numerous to get you really annoyed. You may think, and I might
agree, that software shouldn't have been released in such a state.
But by your own admission you don't know what going on with the bugs fixed or
closed. So perhaps you shouldn't blame the developers for something that you
don't even know is happening.
The 4.3 release notes http://www.kde.org/announcements/4.3/ refers to over
10,000 bugs fixed (vs 2,000 feature requests). Now maybe they are counting
closed for all reasons as fixed, but they said fixed. It surely does not
suggest a project devoting it all its resources to making new stuff.
You complained KDE doesn't care about quality, the 4.9 release notes
http://www.kde.org/announcements/4.9/ note "he KDE Quality Team was set up
earlier this year with a goal to improve the general levels of quality and
stability in KDE software. .... The Team also set up a more rigorous testing
process for releases starting with beta versions"
In short, you seem to have taken your experiences and developed a theory of
the motivation and goals of the developers and the project. But your theory
doesn't fit the facts too well.
Maybe there is insufficient emphasis on software quality. But you make it easy
to ignore your criticisms when you make over the top statements that KDE
doesn't care about quality.
>
> Doesn't the existence of so many bugs tend to illustrate my point?
Well, software has bugs. I'm not sure a bug count is a great quality metric,
but bug-free software is an impossible standard.
>
> > ......
> >
> >> I find very useful the dystopian novel: "The Rise of the Meritocracy"
> >> which is a critique of the idea of "the meritocracy". A meritocracy is
> >> defined by the search for merit -- but that is dependent on the
> >> definition of merit. I find that I have no merit in the KDE project
> >> despite the fact that I went to college and studied EE and computer
> >> science. In the KDE project, you obtain merit be designing a new
> >> application. So, that is the nail that everyone is hitting with their
> >> hammer.
> >
> > Where do you get the idea that you have "no merit in the KDE project", or
> > that someone fixing bugs would be greeted with anything other than
> > enthusiasm? Well, it's free software and so there's bound to be some
> > static, but apart from that :)
>
> I was bluntly told so by a developer -- that formal education in
> software development was not considered. And also told that I needed to
> write an application to obtain merit.
"merit" in this context is not something I'm familiar with, but then I'm not a
KDE developer. Apparently your annoyance in turned annoyed others, which may
have prompted some harsh remarks. Individual developerrs do not speak with
the voice of the entire project.
>
> The project desktop doesn't need another application. It needs
> thousands of bugs fixed. Better yet, it needs Total Quality Management
> methods to prevent the buts ever entering the code base -- hacking
> replaced with design as a method of writing code. And, self taught
> hackers and beginners mentored in how to write better code. Writing an
> application, will not accomplish these things.
>
> Note that I am one of those that needs some mentoring.
It seems unrealistic to expect mentoring from people you are insulting,
particularly when your insults are on shakey factual ground.
Ross
> I am a whiz at
> writing procedural code. I have learned the basics of C++ on a micro
> (inside a class) basis, but I could use some help learning the fine
> points of the macro structure of object oriented code. Actually, this
> is why I find it interesting that I find that people that have learned
> C++ seem to know the macro structure but often don't write the small
> pieces of procedural code that do the actual work of the program well.
>
> BTW, I still use Thunderbird.
___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
