| |||||||||||||
KDE 4, distributors, and bleeding-edge softwareKDE 4, distributors, and bleeding-edge softwarePosted Jan 28, 2009 21:33 UTC (Wed) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946)In reply to: KDE 4, distributors, and bleeding-edge software by pynm0001 Parent article: KDE 4, distributors, and bleeding-edge software
The problem is that, it isn't always predictable how a release would turn out ahead of time. Downstream distributions have to usually incorporate a development snapshot ahead of time and it be nice to have a clear and regular bi-lateral communication on that expectations for that particular release throughout development instead of just at the end where it is difficult to revert back and lose all the QA time and effort.
One of the things that could have been done better is for upstream to make it parallel installable and support that configuration. Some downstream distributions patched things heavily to provide KDE 3 and KDE 4 together and that was repeated duplication of effort without upstream support that could have been avoided.
From Fedora's standpoint:
(Log in to post comments)
KDE 4, distributors, and bleeding-edge software Posted Jan 28, 2009 21:41 UTC (Wed) by pynm0001 (guest, #18379) [Link]
I understand. We actually did quite a bit of work on making KDE 3 and KDE
4 able to coexist. For instance most of the executables that could conceivably end up in the same PATH got "4" tacked onto their name (so now kbuildsycoca is kbuildsycoca4 for instance). I only have ever really used the KDE 3 app from a KDE 4 desktop technique where it worked fine, so I apologize if the Fedora guys tried it and were not able to get KDE 3+4 working well enough.
I've noticed it's amazing at the number of issues I've seen over the years
|
|||||||||||||