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

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: KDE 1.0?
From:       Richard Moore <moorer () cs ! man ! ac ! uk>
Date:       1998-06-08 18:05:02
[Download RAW message or body]


> Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 12:38:57 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Cristian Tibirna <ctibirna@gch.ulaval.ca>
> To: kde-devel@alpha.tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de
> Subject: Re: KDE 1.0?
> 
> On Mon, 8 Jun 1998, Markus Wuebben wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > Anyone have any idea when 1.0 or prereleases thereof will be released?
> > > I'm too lazy to download the newest sources by CVS if a new version will
> > > be released soon...
> > 
> > Very soon.
> > 
> > 
> 
> Hi fellows
> 
> A certain overly hiped Linux software had its black days lately because a
> wrongly understood need to push it out to general use much too soon. The
> wrong move of that authors was supposedly dictated by a certain bin
> international Linux event and the facts unveiled there.
> 
> Please, let us learn from these errors. And let me expose my thoughts
> about what is to learn.
> 
> Me personally, I don't think KDE is ready for 1.0 yet, mainly because of
> the KFM's status and also because of the low coverage of configuration
> issues by GUI elements. 

I think this is a fairly big problem, we need to document these options and add 
some more dialogs.

Rich.


> 
> KFM is an amazing application, but its big complexity and the lack of help
> our precious Torben gets makes this app really an easy target for bugs.
> 
> GUI elements for configuration are lacking because KDE evolves too fast
> :-)
> 
> I stronlgy consider, however, that even it is not ready for 1.0, KDE
> *must* be released with 1.0 version number in order to allow to the
> developers to finaly go further and hop over the beta freeze, freez which
> became quite annoying to the development.
> 
> So, in order to get 1.0 out and also have as much as possible of the
> release innerent quirks out of our way, I propose:
> 
> 1) to have the final rpms, debs and tgzs built and distributed for test to
> the willing KDE developers only, in order for them to test on previously
> cleared out machines that all the isntallation will go well for
> unexperienced users.
> 
> 2) to keep this test at a low profile, in order to avoid unwanted bad
> experiences. The history showed us that Beta2, Beta3 and Beta4 needed all
> corrections and that the one-day-after CVS snapshots were really better
> conceived.
> 
> 3) to have major distributor(s) (SuSe?) concertate one of their
> distribution release with KDE 1.0 big release, in order to have a good
> reference system, besides the on-the-fly installs anybody could do on
> already existing systems.
> 
> Thanks for your attention
> 
> 				Cristian
> 

 _______________________________________________________________________ 
| Richard Moore                         | Email: richard@cs.man.ac.uk   |
| IT301, Computer Science dept.,        |           rich@kde.org        |
| University of Manchester, Oxford Rd., | Phone: (0161) 438 0038 (home) |
| Manchester, M13 9PL                   |        (0161) 275 6270 (work) |
| UK                                    |        (0161) 275 6280 (fax)  |
|_______________________________________|_______________________________|

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