User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Seigo: Focus and Documentation

Seigo: Focus and Documentation

Posted Nov 9, 2012 16:34 UTC (Fri) by brianomahoney (guest, #6206)
In reply to: Seigo: ending the cults of personality in free software by aseigo
Parent article: Seigo: ending the cults of personality in free software

I am a LONG TIME KDE user and I like it, most of the time BUT if Seigo wants less complaint I have some suggestions:

1. Fix Bugs, in a timely way OR document workrounds

2. Stop the feature/menu/config churn and the ape M$ mentality

3. Write decent documentation, KDE's is the worst nonsense I have seen and an auto API extractor is NOT documentation. The documentation of configuration options is particularly BAD!

4. Emplace a build system that says (download [a] ... [f]), cd foo, make or some such and have this verify the correct version of prerequsites, libraries, .h files ...

If I have to read the code of Qt, Kxxx and external package yyy to isolate a bug you have failed.

The Seigo response to being Tovolds bashed is juvenile in the extreem, Linus has a sure sense of design eg Git, outside the Kernel, and a rational appreciation of what most users need is vital now that Gnome is well on the way to the junk yard at the hands of its developers.

What the community needs is Seigo to remove head from ass, and to ensure that the KDE development community is balanced currently it is "Übernahme durch germanischen Denken und Methodik mit einer unwarrented elitäre Haltung beeinflusst."

Do not misunderstand me please, KDE is good and improving all the time, but it could easily be made excellent and thus become the de-facto style leader on the Desktop as Android is in the mobile space.

MFG alle, Brian


(Log in to post comments)

Seigo: Focus and Documentation

Posted Nov 11, 2012 10:24 UTC (Sun) by Del- (guest, #72641) [Link]

1. Bugs are fixed in KDE, but it requires somebody to step up and do it. Just like any other open project without the resources of large software houses. You should rather stick to your complaint on the over-stretching/re-designing part.
2. Agree to some extent. KDE has in periods over-stretched the resources, and various projects should have been less ambitious in favour of getting things done.
3. The documentation is good, but I agree, we should improve it. KDE has a wiki, so I suggest you and I help out.
4. KDE uses git and cmake, it uses the best VCS and build system around. Actually, your last point here makes me wonder if you are trolling, have you even read the KDE documentation?

http://techbase.kde.org/Development/Tutorials/CMake

KDE follows that standard modus operandi for cmake and git, you do:

git clone git://anongit.kde.org/yourprojectofchoice
cd yourprojectofchoice
mkdir build
cd build
cmake ..
make -j4

If this is beyond you, I suggest you stick to binary packages.

Any missing dependencies will typically be reported, you can for instance use tools in the debian-goodies package to track down which package name your distribution uses for the missing dependencies. Typically, you will have a very smooth experience building bleeding edge KDE on the latest Kubuntu.

Reporting bugs in KDE is a very smooth experience. Just about any project has a lot to learn there. It is rarely a problem to identify the package, and a number of volunteers come to the triaging rescue if you produce crappy reports. I believe it is exactly the kind of criticism you give here that frustrates Aaron. It certainly frustrates me. If you have a point, make it. Quit the inaccurate bashing. KDE is an excellent project. We should be grateful, and we should show it.


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds