[OT] Konqueror rules, Dolphin must die

[Art Alexion]

On Monday 03 November 2008 01:13:46 pm Clay Weber wrote:
> > I have decided to opt for continuing KDE 3 until KDE 4 is ready.  I am
> > experimenting with Debian Lenny, as it will support KDE 3 for 3 years
> > after Etch is released, about 4 more years projected.
>
> Are Debian the only ones maintaining KDE3 for any length of time?

I honestly have no idea.  I got my info on Lenny support from the Distrowatch 
article that was cited in another thread and confirmed by a friend in the KDE 
ev.


>
> > Once I get comfortable, my
> > Kubuntu box will become my experimental one, and Lenny for production.
> >
> > I don't understand why the Debian developers can continue to support KDE
> > 3, but the Kubuntu developers cannot.
>
> Debian devs= lots and lots of people
> Kubuntu devs= more or less 3-5 people who do a majority of the work (as
> well as 2 of them who are massively active on KDE specific bugs in
> Launchpad)

Let us not mix apples and oranges.  The core OS is maintained by the Ubuntu 
developers; the Kubuntu team supports the desktop environment only.  So # of 
Debian devs is comparable with number of Ubuntu devs.  I don't know how many 
Debian Lenny devs work exclusively on KDE.  


>
> > This is the reason why Ubuntu 8.04 is
> > LTS, but Kubuntu 8.04 is not.  I understand that the Kubuntu team has
> > blamed it on loss of upstream KDE support, but for some reason, Debian
> > does not have a problem with this.
>
> part of the decision was the *uncertainty* of future support from KDE as
> well as the work involved for the number of devs kubuntu have. The decision
> on LTS status was made by canonical alone, and not at all by the Kubuntu
>  team.

I certainly don't have any knowledge to disagree with you on what Canonical 
decided and what the Kubuntu team decided.  It doesn't make much sense to me 
though for Canonical to make this decision to short circuit the plans or 
wishes of the team that actually does the work and monitors the upstream 
direction.


>
> > The impression I get is that the Kubuntu team is targeting hobbyists and
> > home users and not business users.  Too bad.  If that is true, Kubuntu
> > will never be taken seriously.  I assume that is why OEMs, like Dell, are
> > installing Ubuntu, but not Kubuntu.
>
> Sorry to say, but Ubuntu (and not my favorite distro) is *the* major linux
> distro today.  That is one of the major reasons that Dell chose it. Why
> does Kubuntu need to be as big as Ubuntu for it to be taken seriously?

Three points: 

First, a considerable amount of Kubuntu is just part of Ubuntu.  It's not like 
they are building Kubuntu from scratch.

Second, I have no idea how many people use Kubuntu vs. other KDE based 
distros.  My guess is that the popularity of Ubuntu spills over into the 
branch distros, like Kubuntu and Xubuntu.  I was a KDE fan using it on Red 
Hat 7.3 when Ubuntu was released.  Warty (was it 3.10 or 4.10?) attracted me 
away from the world of RPM, and I used Ubuntu until Kubuntu was announced.  

Third, your question may be a chicken and egg thing.  That is, I don't think 
Kubuntu has to be big to be taken seriously, though it may get bigger if it 
is taken seriously.  I use Linux at home, but I use it for work as well.  
Kubuntu will be taken seriously in the workplace when it is designed for 
reliability and not as a fun experiment.

Until the Intrepid development cycle, I never considered Kubuntu to be the 
poor relative of Ubuntu.  It is a fantastic distro that I have enjoyed using 
from its inception to the present.  I expect to skip Intrepid for all but 
experimental use for now, though.


>
> I do think the Kubuntu team maybe needs to actually define what they are or
> want to be a bit better. My impression is that Kubuntu is a KDE showcase of
> sorts, nothing about home or business focus

Rudeness or not aside, I think Emanoil's comment was not so much directed to 
the dolphin devs for creating it, but to the Kubuntu devs for prematurely 
making it the default.  I really loved Kubuntu, but the recent decisions to 
make alpha software the default has me frustrated and puzzled.