KDE4.3 beta issues

David McGlone david at dmcentral.net
Fri May 29 12:34:18 BST 2009

On Thursday 28 May 2009 09:33:09 pm Terrell Prude' Jr. wrote:
> Willy K. Hamra wrote:
> > Terrell Prude' Jr. wrote:
> >> Dotan Cohen wrote:
> >>>> IF it were not meant for end users, why was it the ONLY version of KDE
> >>>> offered in 8.10?
> >>>
> >>> That is a distro issue, not a KDE issue. Be mad, but at *buntu, not at
> >>> KDE. KDE still offers KDE 3.5.10 for download, and still calls it "the
> >>> more mature version":
> >>> http://kde.org/download/
> >>
> >> Kubuntu's inclusion of it is, yes.  On that point, we agree and always
> >> have.
> >>
> >> HOWEVER...the release of that barely-beta set of tarballs known as KDE
> >> 4.1 (and not "KDE 4.0 Beta") is a *KDE PROJECT* issue, *not* a distro
> >> issue.  Same for what got called 4.0 (should've been called "KDE 4.0
> >> Alpha").  Again, let's hope that the KDE Project doesn't make that kind
> >> of mistake again.  You say "be mad," well, what will make your user base
> >> mad is when you don't own up to your own mistakes and try to blame a
> >> version numbering mistake on your part onto the distros.  Don't do
> >> that.  If it's not ready for end users yet, then release the code, fine,
> >> but don't call it "4.0" or "4.1" without ""alpha" or "beta" on it.  What
> >> part of that are you not understanding?
> >>
> >> --TP
> >
> > KDE has the right to name it whatever they want. the KDE4 API was mature
> > enough, and KDE 4.1 was mature enough to be released as *4.1* with a
> > warning that applications are bound to crash, and it's NOT for
> > productive use. KDE had every damn right, being *their* project, to even
> > call it KDE 4.5 if they want to, as long as their warnings exist.
> > the one to be blamed is kubuntu. THEY are the ones who had no right to
> > include such software in their distro and claim it a stable distro for
> > releasing.
> You're right, they had the right to name it "Cucamonga And We Are Stupid
> 99.999 Omega-3" if they so chose.  But if that's how KDE is going to
> start doing it now, then I'm staying the hell away from any KDE .0, .1,
> or .2 software.  They're getting to be too much like Microsoft now.  I
> don't blame Kubuntu for KDE's inappropriate version numbering, and I
> will not.

I thought KDE 4.0 and later wasn't all that bad. I ditched KDE 3 all together 
about a week after 8.10 was released. I knew if I installed 8.10 the only 
choice was going to be KDE 4 and I took that chance and I went all the way 
through the PPA's on a desktop and a laptop and I've now landed on KDE 4.2

Now that I think about it, I really  don't remember anything that didn't work 
except IMAP address book.  Derrick informed me that it was a problem with 
Dovecot and not KDE.

I really don't understand why you are so bitter about how KDE introduced 
version 4, it worked fine for me and a few others that I had installed on their 
computer, and there is probably many on this list also.

Here's how I feel about it, KDE 3.xx was very stable, and If 4.xx wasn't 
cutting the cake for me, I'm not going to complain about it, I'll just move 
back to what I know works for me.

Isn't that what Linux is all about? Check this out...... Try to find windows XP 
on the shelves in stores today. Good luck! Every store pulled XP for the much 
crappier Vista......... How's that for choice? At least KDE isn't sticking a 
gun in your face forcing you to install 4.xx, which is pretty much what M$ 

David M.

More information about the kubuntu-users mailing list