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

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: Kubuntu asking for input
From:       Kevin Krammer <kevin.krammer () gmx ! at>
Date:       2009-11-04 23:23:23
Message-ID: 200911050023.40155.kevin.krammer () gmx ! at
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]


On Wednesday, 2009-11-04, Martin Gräßlin wrote:

> 3. Patching: it's really difficult to find the patches Kubuntu applies. I
>  tried to look for all patches to kwin and it was painfull (I found one
>  patch and it got removed). While bazaar might be nice for you because of
>  the launchpad integration it's definately not helping in getting more
>  developers. That seems to me like a general problem with the Ubuntu
>  landscape (compare Rosetta).
> 
> There are also some changes in the default settings which are difficult to
> track. Here I would ask: why change the default? If KDE's default is
> improvable contact your upstream. In any case if you have a patch or a
>  change to the default settings: just contact the responsible KDE team. In
>  best case they will accept the patch, in worst case they will tell you why
>  it is a bad idea.
> 
> 4. Ayatana: I really, really dislike the changes done to Kubuntu Karmic due
>  to Ayatana. It is sad that it is completely developed ignoring the
>  community and it is sad that developer power is wasted by developing a
>  system which is not upstreamable and that is known to the developer of the
>  system. The way how Canonical tried to push their changes upstream were
>  suboptimal. To me it looked like Canonical thought that if they send in
>  patch after patch it will be accepted. So here I see potential to improve
>  the communication, but that's more Canonical than Kubuntu.  And that
>  brings us back to patching. Many applications have been patched to support
>  yet another messaging system aka MessageIndicator. Review requests like
>  "This patch has been in use during Kubuntu Karmic development and is now
>  deployed with Kubuntu Karmic version" illustrate the problem. What's the
>  advantage of having a review, if it is already out in the wild?

While the two points above are annoying for as long as they happen, the good 
thing is that they will end at some point.
Canonical, like many others before, is currently in an evolutionary phase 
where they try to be as incompatible as possible to anyone else to leverage 
their current popularity for a sort of soft vendor lock-in, e.g. getting 
software explicitly packaged for Ubuntu.

We had this before: e.g. Redhat shipping a compiler that does not exist 
upstream, Mandriva totally abusing the menu system so non-Mandriva packages 
wouldn't show up, etc (can't remember what SuSE did, but back then we user 
support people would recognize one of their users within half a sentence).

Not a fun period for the upstream project but usually resulting in a better 
relationship afterwards. 
My guess is that the pain period is dictated by managment people and once 
their superiors understand what harm has been inflicted upon their brand for 
short time benefit, they put people with better understanding into positions 
of decision influence.

It is very alien to how our communities work but it is business as usual in 
corporate world.

My prognosis is that about two years from now Canonical has secured a position 
in the desktop linux sector which the feel comfortable about, probably 
something like Red Hat has in the server sector.
At which point the will (might not but I am quite sure) help to really advance 
the whole ecosystem, not just theirs.

Until then I'd consider suggestions of improvements as useful as bikeshedding, 
with the additional bonus of creating really nice flamewars for boring 
weekends.

Cheers,
Kevin

-- 
Kevin Krammer, KDE developer, xdg-utils developer
KDE user support, developer mentoring

["signature.asc" (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]