[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: Questions about splitting kdebase into a plethora of packages
From:       Lauri Watts <lauri () kde ! org>
Date:       2005-02-10 23:38:11
Message-ID: 200502110038.18594.lauri () kde ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]


On Thursday 10 February 2005 22.17, Lokheed wrote:

>  From what I have read and the replies, it appears KDE does not have
> really any official stance but my main concern is the stability. I have
> yet to read about stability issues in splitting up kde like this. I was
> under the assumption that some components (kcontrol for example) where
> critical for kde to function, but I have not read anything to disprove
> or prove this.

It's less about stability, than about expected behaviour of applications.  

For instance: If someone asks how to configure flash, we can tell them where 
it is in kcontrol.  It's needlessly confusing to the user if it's not there 
where we tell them, and means that well meaning users who read the 
documentation or google for the answer first, will by the time they get to us 
be doubly confused.  So they have to first go install a separate package to 
add the capability to use plugins to konqueror first.  And we have to 
remember to nag users to tell us what distribution of what os they're using, 
before answering their question, since the answer will vary widely depending 
on what that is. 

One that used to come up on debian a lot (not in a long time, it was fixed): 
The laptop monitoring daemon and the GUI to configure it, were quite 
separate.  Many users would install the daemon, and have no way to configure 
it.  A couple managed to install the gui, without the daemon, and wonder why 
changing the settings had no effect.  

Dependency chains on this granular a level are just a nightmare to manage 
without getting into a loop somewhere, and people manage to circumvent even 
fairly careful checking, if they're determined enough.

I should note, breaking things up above the kdebase level is much more 
successful  - the boundaries between applications becomes so much clearer.  
I tend to describe kdelibs the build-time dependencies for KDE-the-desktop and 
kdebase the runtime dependencies for KDE-the-desktop, and indeed most of us 
when offering help tend to assume that *at least* all of kdelibs and kdebase 
are present, even if the rest is only piecemeal.    Sure, most apps will run 
fine without kdebase, but you'll have a hard time configure a lot of 
behaviour, application internal commands may not work as expected, resources 
may not be available to you, and there may be no easy way to change things.  

For instance, it's short sighted to avoid installing konsole because you don't 
want to use, without also installing the parts of kcontrol that allow you to 
tell all KDE apps what you *do* prefer.  Or to not install arts, but then not 
install the knotify tools that would let you use an external player for audio 
notifications, and so on.  KDE as a desktop is actually quite accomodating to 
people who don't want to use the default applications.  KDE as a pile of 
semi-randomly selected bits and pieces, not so much.  

or my favourite: Konqueror, with no kioslaves installed.  That one actually 
*was* asked on IRC a couple of times in the last week.

Regards,
-- 
Lauri Watts
KDE Documentation: http://docs.kde.org
KDE on FreeBSD: http://freebsd.kde.org

[Attachment #5 (application/pgp-signature)]

>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]