>> >>> > Hi everyone, >>> > >>> > I have a few concerns about TDE R14 and 3.5.13.2 SRU >>> > >>> > It seems to me that 3.5.13.2 SRU has next to perfect stability, >>> features >>> > and reliability, while R14 is not there yet. >>> > By looking at this page: http://www.trinitydesktop.org/patches/ , >>> almost >>> > all I can see is that the dev team is working very hard to just keep >>> R14 >>> > in working conditions. Sometimes Amarok doesn't start, sometimes >>> desktop >>> > or menus are unresponsive for a moment, some themes doesn't work >>> > completely and it is not like if the user would benefit from a new >>> set >>> of >>> > feature or a complete visual overhaul. I cannot see why an user would >>> > benefit from using the upcoming R14 when it is compared to the >>> stability >>> > of 3.5.13.2 SRU. Everything works as it should in 3.5.13.2. It would >>> have >>> > been a very good ground for improving TDE on top of it. All of this >>> > trouble is supposed to be for the integrations of QT4 parts in TDE, >>> but it >>> > seems to me that in R14, it will be used nowhere, not even for a >>> single >>> > check-box in a config panel. Maybe it is just me, maybe I would need >>> some >>> > explanations. >>> > >>> > I mean that if the efforts has been made to make TDE more attractive >>> to >>> > new users and to modernize it, it would certainly have more >>> popularity. As >>> > well as making a new ''outside'' on top of an outdated car is not >>> good, >>> > changing everything under the hood and keeping the old outdated >>> > ''outside'' is certainly not better at all. I know that TDE could be >>> > better, if some attention could be thrown at things that are not just >>> > under the hood. >>> > >>> > Just one man's opinion... >>> > Tell us what you think! >>> > >>> > -Alexandre >>> > >>> >>> For starters, look at the number of reported crashes from the threaded >>> components of the 3.5.13.x series. Those reports *cannot* be fixed >>> without the major threading changes made in TQt3 for R14.0.0. Just >>> because something is stable on your system does not mean that it will >>> be >>> stable on someone else's system if threading is involved. ;-) Also >>> keep >>> in mind that R14 finally gets rid of HAL (and in fact uses many modern >>> services for mounting, network management, etc.)--without those >>> changes, >>> TDE users would find it increasingly more difficult, if possible at >>> all, >>> to perform basic tasks like connecting to wireless networks and >>> mounting >>> USB flash drives. >>> >>> There is a reason that we have been constantly delaying R14--that is to >>> make sure R14 is a high quality, stable release. >>> >>> Tim >>> >> >> Hi, >> >> Of course, the introduction of the new hardware platform is not what >> causes problems and yes, over the time and releases, R14 will get back >> to >> the reliability of 3.5.13.2. >> >> But with all the renaming issues (which does not improve TDE at all), a >> lot of dev time has been used, and this time >> would have been better used for things that are not under the hood only. >> The current TDE look-and-feel was great in Win XP era, but time has >> changed. Interfaces have evolved, sometimes for the worse (MS office >> ribbon...) and sometimes for the better (Win 7 and parts of KDE 4). I am >> sure that there is some things to do to refresh TDE, but it needs some >> openness from the TDE dev team. >> >> Some pop-ups could be made less intrusive, some widgets could be made to >> be less Win95-like and many little details could change, just to make >> sure >> that TDE doesn't die over the time because it was frozen forever in >> 2005. >> MATE has already improved its theming and color scheme to refresh its >> appearance. Their website is more attractive, and it doesn't means that >> it >> has removed features to MATE or that their website is unusable. >> >> -Alexandre >> > > If you think TDE can be improved in specific ways please let us know, I > know at least I am open to this! However, we will not change TDE just for > the sake of "modern looks" (typically rather ugly IMHO) or just for the > sake of change--the proposed modification needs to have some solid thought > behind it as to how it will benefit TDE's users on a functional level. > > Tim I forgot this above: As to why renaming *is* important (aside from legal concerns, user confusion, etc.), here is a bug caused solely by stomping on the KDE4 class names and utility names: http://bugs.pearsoncomputing.net/show_bug.cgi?id=1697 In other words, that bug would still be open if the renaming projects had not been completed. Tim