My last two posts attracted a lot of users who spouted nonsense such as:
Please, stop pushing gnome technology to KDE.
or:
Let’s do an experiment:
Write tomorrow on planet gnome: “More Nepomuk in More Places!”
I would like to see these comments on “cooperation”.
I’m a strong believer in free speech and feel that it is very very very wrong to remove someone’s comment simply because you disagree with them. I’ve only ever deleted one comment on my blog, and that was on accident.
To remedy the situation, I’ve installed a plugin that disemvowels trolls.
f nly smntc thng n gnm s Ztgst, why thy jst dpt Npmk? Myb knd ls? N? Cprtn n nly _N_ wy s n cprtn.
I find this to be hilarious and effective.
However, the real issue here is that people even hold such ideas in the first place. Aaron wrote a lengthy blog post on the issue last year, and here’s a relevant quote:
Why do I care, or perhaps more importantly: why should you care? Well, this has become a pattern of behavior that we’re seeing more often and it runs directly counter to the idea of a Free software desktop platform where applications are highly interoperable. It is indeed not incumbent upon any project, be it GNOME, KDE or any other to adopt every single technology on offer. However, it is in all our best interests to work together more rather than less and to share what makes sense, even if sometimes it means some short term compromise. KDE has made that decision many times even in recent times as we adopted various technologies such as D-Bus, shared mimetypes, shared icon theme definitions, etc. It’s taken a lot of effort on our part and at times we’ve had to make some compromises, but our users have been reaping the benefits..
The same can be said about PulseAudio, Zeitgeist, GStreamer, or whatever other technology out there. Why reinvent the wheel? I fiercely fight against not-invented-here-ism. The anti-collaboration comments stem from cluelessness and inability to put aside differences. I feel that I have the benefit of not being around during the thickest of the flamewars, when admitting you use that *other* desktop environment was grounds for a lynchmob. There are a lot of decisions in Gnome that I don’t agree with. There are also just as many in KDE. I use Gnome 3 on both my laptops, KDE 4 on my desktop, Android on my tablet, and Maemo on my phone. Somehow I manage to get stuff done, believe it or not.
If you’re one of those people who has an issue with KDE using gnome technologies, or GNOME using KDE, here’s a list of the plumbing that the two desktops use that you should think about before deciding to post:
- DBus
- Icon naming spec
- Desktop Notification spec
- OpenDocument format
- Linux Kernel
- WebKit
- X11
- Zeitgeist
- GLib
- PulseAudio
- udev
- PolicyKit/polkit
- PackageKit
- RTKit
- ALSA
- GStreamer
- sqlite3
- GRUB
- xsmp
- ICE
- NetworkManager
- Telepathy
- devkit
- colord
If you’re going to post a comment here that claims there is no collaboration anywhere, or that collaboration is bad, please back it up with hard evidence beyond “because gnome invented it”. Otherwise you will be disemvoweled.
And now, we pause for a unicorn moment, to cleanse the mind of bad thoughts:
Mandatory Unicorn Chaser
I didnt know that KDE uses colord, thaught only KDE on Fedora uses it right now!
I don’t think peoples’ problem is so much with collaborating with GNOME. Rather, I think it is a perception that GNOME developers expect other desktop environments to adopt technologies developed by them but is not willing to adopt technologies developed by others, and will developer their own technologies from scratch instead.
This isn’t just my perception, in fact from Aaron’s post that you linked to he said the exact same thing:
“So while I personally think it is certainly acceptable for GNOME to elect not to get on board with Status Notifiers / appindicators (or other things, like a shared job D-Bus spec, or usage metadata for freedesktop.org specs, or ..), I do think it is unfortunate, particularly as this is not a recent development but an apparent longer term trend. ”
In fact that entire post was a long complaint about GNOME’s refusal to cooperate with KDE.
So people are frustrated by what they feel is a one-way street, with KDE readily adopting GNOME technology, even going so far as to abandon their own pre-existing solutions for the sake of compatibility, while they see GNOME developers as refusing to reciprocate. So people have gotten fed up, and are becoming unwilling to adopt additional GNOME technologies until GNOME developers show some intention of doing the same.
Whether that is appropriate in this context is another question, but unless you are planning on disemvowling Aaron’s post you linked to I don’t think you can dismiss the sentiment quite so easily.
Blog post by lxde dev, about cooperation with gnome:
“IF YOU DON’T LIKE TO BE FORCED TO USE GNOME STANDARDS, PLEASE JOIN XDG MAILING LIST.”
http://blog.lxde.org/?p=361
That would be a more persuasive argument if GNOME devs were willing to adopt XDG standards developed by other desktop environments.
@TheBlackCat, you are wrong, the GNOME developers are not against the cooperation, but they are against half baked technologies that where thinked for one desktop in particular, the dbus notification system proposed by KDE developers was half baked, the documentation was incomplete and was only putted in the context of the KDE desktop, when the GNOME developers asked about some changes needed for their desktop or questioned some desitions made by them, the KDE developers became inflexible, so GNOME was not going to adopt that technology.
When GNOME makes a technology, it makes it in the context of the FreeDesktop not only on their desktop, that’s why their technologies are more used and accepted, because are abstract.
Lets not resurrect this discussion from the dead by beating this horse into a fine mist. Whats done is done and there is only tomorrow.
that is utter horseshit. but hey, it’s ramsees, what do i expect?
a) the notification system was fully functional, and works to this day in Unity and Plasma Desktop / Netbook / Active as it was laid out then
b) documentation was expanded on as requested at the time, in a timely fashion.
c) many technologies that KDE has adopted, or which have originated in GNOME, have lacked accurate or useful documentation and have been full of questionable design decisions (the galigo spec comes to mind over and over when writing that, actually)
nobody is perfect. we don’t expect them to be. but let’s be honest about it.
delusions are for the insane and religious. the rest of us should dabble in fact.
Put the links to documentation, I have read the news letters, so where are yours? The only think I recall you agreed was to change some function names, now, The fact it is functional for KDE and Unity it does not make it usable for everyone else, because if I recall correctly you even complained because Unity was not using the notifications as the way it was designed for. but hey, it is Aaron, so who cares?
If it is functional for KDE and Unity the problem lays in Gnome. It’s such simple. It’s gnome who tries to reinvent a wheel and make things incompatible. KDE and Unity were first.
I think KDE can just cooperate with Unity and gnome will die lonely. They suffer from the NIH syndrome, so they won’t accept anything. It was already proven many for times. KDE and Unity have much bigger market share than gnome.
I think color will be shipped by default with KDE 4.9 as far as I now.
,,
I agree with the thought of cooperation and strongly recommended it between the to projects. Gnome & KDE and all linux distros has 0.XX % of the all OS market Share and we might be less in the future if every project decided to reinvent the wheel.
we need more cooperation for better future.
Trever, are you at all can understand what you read?
Epic fail with quoting Aaron blog post.
My intention wasn’t to take his words and twist things for my purposes. If I did, I’m sorry. I wrote how I interpreted that particular blog post in light of this year. Things were different back then, and I feel things have changed a bit by now.
Yes, you twisted things for your purposes and accidentally admit right to troll that you quot.
Now… Is that makes you even more troll then him, because you have control over changing his posts?
I accidentally admitted what where?
Both of our writeups are open to interpretation and discussion. If you’re going to say that I am purposefully twisting the words of others, then you are oblivious to the kind of person I am. I find it rather insulting that you would attack me with ad-hominem instead of directly addressing the issue of collaboration.
“I accidentally admitted what where?”
Quoting Aaron’s blog post, you admitted coco posts. Few times hi mentioned that cooperation KDE-Gnome is poor especially at the level Gnome adopting someone other technologies. The same wrote TheBlackCat.
Probably the best will be perform an experiment, which hi suggested.
Nw vn th xprmnt s nt ndd.
Rmss pst s prld t cmmnts n plnt gnm.
Y cll cc trll, bt lt thrs lk Rmss FDng n cmmnts?
Nw drctly ddrssng t y:
[Where are the vowels?]Y hv n blls!
Anything that’s written should be interpreted by the time that it is written. Doubly so if your intention is to show that it was wrote with this in mind.
I find it hard to think you didn’t intend to twist the meaning when the very next sentence in the post is
“So while I personally think it is certainly acceptable for GNOME to elect not to get on board with Status Notifiers / appindicators (or other things, like a shared job D-Bus spec, or usage metadata for freedesktop.org specs, or ..), I do think it is unfortunate, particularly as this is not a recent development but an apparent longer term trend. “
I’ve just reread what I typed and realized that it should read written in the second sentence.
so, i don’t think Trever took words innacurately out of context. yes, out of context, but not innacurately. what he quoted is, imho, true and i think he applies it well.
yes, it is not a 2 way street, and in my opinion that is the loss of GNOME and their users. it hurts F/OSS as a result, but there’s little we can do about that other than make it clearly known to the public that if you use GNOME, you support a divisive and non-cooperative method of F/OSS development. buyer beware.
for KDE, yes, we should use what makes sense.
if Zeitgeist makes sense, let’s use it. Zeitgeist and Nepomuk should share the same RDF database, as from a design POV that makes all the sense in the world. from a function and API POV, Zeitgeist and Nepomuk are complimentary (one being events based the other being about data relationships) and as long as they work together on my system (so i don’t have a Zeitgeist world *and* a Nepomuk world) then bully for everyone.
if that technical cooperation isn’t finished yet, then i’d suggest that prioritizing that over putting Zeitgeist into more KDE apps should be done .. then put it in more KDE apps
so, Trever, happy hacking and keep on bringing the world together.
Hi Aaron.
Zeitgeist and Nepomuk can live beside each other. Zeitgeist can push its data into Nepomuk we have an k-activity-manager extension for that. But can also have its own DB. While I disagree with the idea of using the SAME DB for logs and metdata (Nepomuk should not be treated like a kitchen sink, plus scalability and DB size), we decided to make it possible.
Also Zeitgeist is a running process that evaluates events before they are inserted (by checking if subjects of these events are blacklisted or attach a geolocation to it).
We use the same ontology that Nepomuk uses, and only cover a very tiny “header” version of what Nepomuk covers. We focused on not clashing into each others domains. So both DO live beside each other in harmony.
You can easily query Zeitgeist for uris of complex situations like get me all files i used with X during the last 7 days excluding videos. This can’t be done with Nepomuk without querying several times.
But Zeitgeist can not provide you about info about the uri. So since we use the same Nepomuk ontology it to describe the “headers” of our metadata it is easy to just query nepomuk for the data.
Cheers
Seif
Thats sorta the plan. I want to put Zeitgeist into a handful of applications so we can start generating data and having a look at how it can be used. Then, we start adding Nepomuk into the whole thing to add a lot more intelligence.
I hope to be adding a lot of that bridging functionality to a common library over the summer, so that you can query the whole system all at once and get a ton of metadata back. Its getting there and we don’t yet have a clearly defined plan written down, but we’re making progress.
Very exciting
Just ignore the trolls. Arguing (correctly) will just wind you up. Commenters rarely represent the full audience. People just complain when they’re stressed.
In my first blog on KDE about LightDM I got royally flamed by people kicking up a (made up ) fuss with nonsense about Ubuntu and collaboration, now it’s generally all positive. I think they probably got bored.
Just keep hacking, rather than getting into arguments with them. Zeitgiest isn’t even a Gnome tech, just one they adopted more than we did.
I don’t think GNOME adopted Zeitgeist, really. It’s developed by developers who are close to the GNOME community and some are GNOME developers, but I don’t think it’s part of GNOME proper.
Zeitgeist is probably a GNOME project in the same sense that DBus is — it isn’t.
There is a pretty rational reason why “collaboration” (actually an euphemism, meaning KDE adopts “foreign” technologies) is not a aim in itself: control. If you have control over a technology you can easily adapt it to your needs, otherwise you are at the whim of the respective developers, exspecially when they use an exotic language. In the case of KDE the adopted technologies were not always beneficial to the user: Because of API changes, Network Manager was often broken in KDE. Regarding HAL and upower&Co Solid should have better directly used the kernel/udev, etc. Besides, to accuse other people of trolling because they disagree with your sales pitch is poor style.
totally agree with u
kwin + konqueror + kate were the reason why i used KDE3.
plasma + dolphin + kate + dbus + hal + networkmanager + gstreamer + glib + javascript .. are the reason why i dont use KDE4 anymore..
and again: no idea about this technologies, but spreading fud.
kde4 does not depend on gstreamer, hal or networkmanager.
there’s just a gstreamer backend in phonon, you could use wicd instead of networkmanager and hal is not needed, since you have udev, but you could use it.
most hilarious thing is this javascript hate. inform yourselve about jit-compilers
have fun with outdated software!
All these technologies were adopted by KDE: HAL was required (Solid backend), NetworkManager and GStreamer (Phonon backend) are optional, but they are used by distributions by default.
> actually an euphemism, meaning KDE adopts “foreign” technologies
that is what it has from time to time meant in practice because of the behavior of GNOME.
that is not what collaboration means, however. it means working with others to build things that work together.
KDE’s system tray icons are used in unity. that was collaboration where someone else adopted our technology. the same is actually true about many of the original freedesktop.org specs.
the measurement is not “who is using whose tech” but “who is benefiting”. if we make it a cock measurement game of who made what, that misses that point of delivering good results to our users.
that many GNOME developers resent KDE using “their” technology (seeing KDE as a “freeloader”, which is demonstrably incorrect but also extremely petty and missing the point and purpose of F/OSS in the first place) say a lot. we’re not SUPPOSED to use what works, only what WE make .. because that’s the “rules”, right? build little fences between projects.
fuck the user. fuck good result. be “real men” and fight.
well i say fuck that. we’ll do what’s best for the technology and make the best uses of our scant resources. and yes, that means graciously taking advantage of the hard work of others released under copyleft licenses.
viva la freedom.
don’t get caught up in the wrong argument.
There is nothing to be said against a pragmatic approach to use things if they are usefull irrespective of their origin. But there is another phenomenon: A lot of social pressure is excerted to adopt some technology deemed as “standard” irrespective of technical merit or user-visible benefits, for the mere sake of forming a unified platform, under the heading of “collaboration” (really meaning adoption). This is not so much related to GNOME and its community, but to (at least) two companies and their interests to establish a “standard” middleware layer between kernel and UI.
S0 r3m0v1ng v0w3ls 1s n0t c3ns0r1ng? Fvck y0v.
C3ns0r my 4ss.
[Where are the vowels?]Well aren’t you clever!
Hi!
Thank you for that post! I thought about writing something similar for a long time too… Just don’t listen to these people, just continue what you do, because what you do is awesome!
Personally I think we should move more projects to the Freedesktop context, so they’re not “GNOME Projects” or “KDE Projects” anymore.
Also, I decided to ignore people crying “you use GNOME technologies” as this is just plain wrong – I contributed code to many of these “GNOME” projects, and I’m KDE developer, so these projects stopped beeing GNOME-only as soon as we made use of them.
Also, most stuff is already part of Freedesktop, where it is easy to collaborate on it.
Thinking about this… I think Coco has a point, after all…
Why don’t you really write in Planet GNOME what Coco suggested? (“More Nepomuk in More Places!”, or, better yet, should I add, “Let’s add Akonadi to GNOME!”). It would be a good test for how willing GNOME developers are to cooperate.
In fact, I made that request about Akonadi before, only to be greeted by an angry Evolution developer telling me “we won’t do that because Evolution is there”. Akonadi should be a GREAT addition to any GNOME desktop, and there are GTK+ concept-proof mail readers.
Because we probably we’ll next see: “Nepomuk from scratch” instead, from Gnome devs.
Not to mention the “anti-C++ attitude”, but “anti-Vala” is bad. What an objectivity…
Before that, it was even worse.
Some time ago, I was researching for my degree thesis and I requested some data that needed to be burned in a CD. This happened in a NGO and the guy happened to be a member of the local GNOME community.
Well, he fired up K3B to burn the CD (back then, there wasn’t any serious alternative to K3B in the GNOME side) and told me, ceremoniously: “Please, don’t tell anyone I used K3B to burn this”.
Some developers try to step up and fight against this “GNOME vs KDE” hostility, but the truth is: this antagonism some times is the very thing that keeps united some local LUGs, specially GNOME ones. And it’s users, the guys who don’t know about how things are done, and not developers, the main reservoir for this hatred.
This is madness.
Actually I think those are two very bad examples… Both still make me freak out every day I’m using KDE…
Akonadi works a treat here. I maximized my Akonadi usage installing not only the Akonadi Google backend, but the experimental Akonadi Facebook backend too. And now I’m a fan of Akonadi.
Regarding Nepomuk, there were some massive speed improvements in KDE 4.8.2 and KDE 4.8.3. And the solution for the issue of “Nepomuk is eternally using my CPU” was simply… let Nepomuk use ALL my CPU. I disabled the CPU throttling for the Akonadi Nepomuk backend, let Nepomuk index 40,000 mails and 20,000 files in ~14 hours (Thunderbird is slower, in fact, and let’s not speak about Windows Search), and, after those 14 hours, and with all updates, Nepomuk CPU idle usage is 0%. And stays that way.
So, yes, I want Akonadi and Nepomuk. Also, if we have GNOME, or someone else, fixing Akonadi or Nepomuk bugs, then we have something better for everyone
.
Almost all (something like 95 %) KDE users I know either turn off/ uninstall both Akonadi and Nepomuk on new system setups, or have already switched from KDE to some lightweight DEs.
I don’t need any of this (especially Nepomuk), so I just turn it off. When don’t, it keeps crashing all the time.
These technologies would be great, if they were *optional*.
You just said that most of the people you know either turn off or uninstall them so how are they not optional? The same can be done with Zeitgeist too so I fail to see the problem here.
There is already some sort of Nepomuk for GNOME called Tracker, it is a reinvented wheel yes, but it comes with no KDE (kdecore, kdeui, …) , which is the reason behind the rewrite I guess.
I think both sides could have done better job at communicating maybe about past projects.
From our side (Zeitgeist), we met up and got invited to KDE events and sprints to integrate Zeitgeist and collaborate with KDE devs. We do not represent GNOME. One of the reasons, we did not host our technology on gnome.org for us to be cross desktop.
GNOME has no full-dependency on Zeitgeist (yet) and so doesn’t KDE. So its fair to assume that we are desktop neutral.
at the risk of getting “disemvoweled”.
There’s a lot of complaining from you about people being angry with you, but precariously little thinking done about _why_ they might be angry, other than some specious, and may I say rather signifying for the Gnome crowd, siege-mentality. Your little “disemvowelification” stunt fits pretty well in with this, btw.
Let me spell it out for you why I, and plenty of people with me do not want anything to do with Gnome.
1. Gnome preaches “useability” and “user friendlessness”, but fails so hard at both it’s the laughing stock of anyone with real grounding in the fields of cognitive science and HMI. It’s all about “the way of the Gnome Developer, or the high way.”
2. Any kind of criticism is met by fingers stuck to the knuckles in the ears and silly sounds, or if that fails, angry outbursts and accusations of “hating”, and “trolling”.
3. Steadfast ignoring of any risk or hazards associated with your fabulous tech. Zeitgeist is a splendid example of this. It is the prefect tool for the oppressive regime, be it religious, communist or corporatist. It’s just like facebook, keeps track of everything you do, with who you interact and best of everything, keeping it up-to-date is done by the user him/her self. Only, Zeitgeist — ah, the sweet irony, was it on purpose? — is even more insidious than fb. FB and Zeitgeist works the same way, they both offer some superficial “benefits”, in order to lull the user in, but FB is easy to avoid, while Zeitgeist does its dirty work behind your back if you don’t watch out!
I’m sure this post will be met with the usual amount of huff, puff and handwaving, maybe even your petty little censoring game, but it doesn’t matter. You read it, and so did others before you managed to silence it.
Zeitgeist is 100% free software and developed via open source methods. If you are paranoid about Zeitgeist tracking all your activities, you are free to modify it to act as a dummy API endpoint and let all the event information disappear into the aether.
If you are concerned about an oppressive regime making a copy of your zeitgeist database, feel free to build your system without it. While you’re at it, make sure you audit every single line of source code your system runs, right down to the BIOS and your ethernet port’s firmware.
We are doing nothing dirty here. If you think we are, then perhaps you shouldn’t be using software you personally didn’t write.
The problem is not that you cannot be trusted, actually we trust that you will not send our information to anyone. The problem is that the information is stored. If you live in an oppressive regime that happily confiscates your computer whenever they suspect you of anything, they will be very happy to find all that information right there (for example: no need to ask your browsing behavior to the internet company, it is on your own computer). The fact that all the information gathered by Nepomuk, Akonadi and Zeitgeist (NAZ) is stored in SQL databases smells like the Windows registry: you can only access it with specialized software (like sqlitebrowser) which is as user-friendly as Windows’ regedit, those databases become huge very fast and therefore it becomes very hard or impossible to clean up the sensitive parts. I switched from Windows to Linux because I want to have full control over my configuration and my data. NAZ are taking the power out of my hands and I don’t like it! Don’t get me wrong: you are free to develop NAZ, I am happy that NAZ exist, but I don’t like that I have no control over NAZ (and with “no control” I mean that I have no control over what it stores, where on my computer it stores the information, and I am unable to selectively remove sensitive information) and I want the easy option to use a NAZ-free computer.
Then don’t use those technologies. It’s that freaking simple.
Encrypt your disks. Then again, if you live in such a world, you probably have much much bigger concerns than your browser history.
As it stands, your usage history is stored in a bunch of different places:
* KRecentDocuments
* GTKRecentManager
* Dragon stores your play history in its own config
* Juk and Amarok retain playlists between sessions
* Amarok collects lots of statistics about your music habits
* Chrome/Firefox/Rekonq/Konqueror/whatever have their own history storage
* ~/.bash_history
Zeitgeist takes all that history from various places and puts it in one location. If a government has the capacity to confiscate your device, they likely already have a tool to combine all this information into one neat and tidy database. At worst, Zeitgeist saves them a few minutes of time. At best, you the user have a single place to go to when you need to delete any incriminating evidence.
sqlite3′s file format is extensively documented and writing a tool that isn’t sqlitebrowser or the command line interface is trivial: http://www.sqlite.org/fileformat.html
What about encryption, passwords and the UK? I call that an oppressive government.
Wow, what an own goal. Handwaving, huffing, puffing, “my way or the high way”, and siege mentality in one short post. Impressive.
None of which ultimately addresses the point though. I could do those things, or just link the files to /dev/null, or what ever. But that requires quite a lot of technical know-how, and btw isn’t Gnome making a point of “reaching out” to the naïve, computer illiterate users out there? But I digress.
The simple fact here remains that information being stored in a number of places is no excuse to introduce yet another. The second thing that makes your argument intellectually dishonest, and makes me call Zeitgeist “dirty”, is that while all the applications you list below holds a lot of information, that behaviour is directly linked to the user’s interaction with those applications, and thus intuitively understandable. It’s obvious that if you don’t want anyone accessing your browser history you should remove anything related to it.
Zeitgeist, however, is installed in the background without warning and immediately starts taking notes like the dirty little digital stalker it is, all while the victim doesn’t really know it’s there or where the information is stored. And thanks to modern day package management, even if you uninstall it, you can’t really be sure it’s not going to be installed again behind your back, unless you again take considerable technical know-how on the part of the user for granted.
Zeitgeist being open is completely irrelevant. What matters is what it does, how it behaves and how its developers behave. Trying to sneak in a digital peeping Tom into everyone’s computer isn’t acceptable. Requiring for all intents and purposes every user to be intimately familiar with package management and the various hidden files in $HOME, or even a programmer able to write his own backend in order to opt out is not acceptable. Refusing to admit Zeitgeist having serious and very real implications wrt privacy etc is not acceptable. Trying to paint anyone raising these issues as “paranoid”, “troll” or “hater” isn’t acceptable. These are the reasons why I don’t trust Zeitgeist, and I don’t trust you. “Don’t use it” is just a cop-out, since that’s not a decision most users even get to make, unless you’re suggesting people should stay with Windows.
I feel very sad to see that, while you’re discussing these opinions, Google succeeded where the community itself failed: making Linux a mainstream OS. I’ve used both KDE, GNOME as well as Unity and Xfce (LXDE, etc.) and I don’t mind who started an interesting project. Neither most of the Linux users do. I’m thankful with all the developers who contribute to the open source community – including Trever, of course – and I think this “radical” approach is just useless. I don’t want to seem a sort of evangelist, but… guys, outside there’s a beautiful world. I agreed with Mark Shuttleworth, when he said that Ubuntu «is not a democracy». FYI, I’m a Gentoo user. Greetings from Italy.
I agree with him. FOSS isn’t about choice, it is about freedom. Something I say a lot with linux audio is that the only “choice” you get is “use ALSA+pulseaudio” or “crappy audio”. If you manage to get your sound working without PulseAudio, good for you, but I can’t be held responsible when it breaks.
The VideoLAN project disagrees with you, the FAQ states: “Audio and video are out of sync. Try using another audio output plugin and, under Unix, kill esd, artsd or pulseaudio if they are running.” The main problem is that your opinions are not based on some objective assessment, they are polemical and border on evangelism. There is still a VLC backend for Phonon.
Pulseaudio is still far from the superior choice for audio, the reason I am using it is that skype does not work without it when using bluetooth headset. The old skype works fine with alsa bluetooth setup so I would blame skype rather than praise pulseaudio for this. With pulseaudio, the sound goes out of sync under heavy load, become stuttering after really heavy load. And it uses only slightly less cpu time and generate more wakeups than mplayer itself when playing a movie! Pulseaudio might be the solution for everything in the future. But I do not think it is fair to call other audio solution crappy when pulseaudio is not doing much better at least for now.
I actually remember the moment when I installed some KDE application and it depended on gnome-keyring. That was a huge WTF!
I don’t really care about the NIH syndrome anymore, but I do care about integration and stuff like that and _this_ is *not* going to help it.
So, you care about integration, but you find it a big WTF that KDE uses gnome-keyring?
Integration is bad unless it’s integration that was invented here.
Yup, just like when KDE started using DBus, which gnome devs wrote, which was the next evolution of DCOP, which was invented by KDE.
One thing will lead to another, and next thing you know, Nazis riding dinosaurs.
All other KDE apps used KWallet or something, so it was kind of ridiculous to have at least two password storages.
Interesting, what software was that then, and was it KDE that made it depend on gnome-keyring? I’m guessing it was something to do with NetworkManager and it was the distro packaging that pulled in gnome-keyring, I’ve seen that happen. I seriously doubt there’s any code in the KDE core repository that uses gnome-keyring, as that would break a lot of our rules.
Funny you should mention that though, as storing passwords is another great success story of G and K devs working together on integration. The new SecretsService infrastructure for shared password files is a huge step forward and resulted from some pragmatic devs from both camps sitting down together to solve a very real shared problem.
I only believe in Open Source. Keep going
Pingback: Trever Fischer “linciato” – nei commenti – per il lavoro su Zeitgeist | RampaCrew
Pingback: Trever Fischer “linciato” – nei commenti – per il lavoro su Zeitgeist | Indipedia – Indipendenti nella rete
Pingback: L’interminabile guerra tra GNOME e KDE li farà estinguere entrambi « Fabiolinux
I don’t think as many people would even care about this when the standard procedure wouldn’t be like:
1. gnome people make something potentially usefull (networkmanager, pulseaudio, whatever)
2. integrate it nicely into their desktop
3. kde starts using it, eventually making other options “deprecated” or “unsupported”
4. kde integration stays subpar and only halfway usable for years (kmix, and does the kde network management applet supports system connections yet?)
5. people get told to use the gnome tools instead
It isn’t surprising that people start to think that integrating “gnome apps” makes kde worse.
Whats the point of removing the vowels ? You might as well remove the comment, I can’t read it either way.
By defacing the comments you judge “bad”, you are no better than your trolls.
Disemvowelment discourages adding comments that don’t contribute to the discussion, while still allowing the author’s voice to be heard. If you consider this to be defacing or otherwise unfair, feel free to give me an example of where it has been unjustly applied. I’ll gladly explain my rationale.
I’m ashamed you are a part of our community.
Hahahaha, what?
Pingback: Przegląd prasy 9/2012 | KDEFamily