Message: previous - next
Month: November 2013

RE: [trinity-users] Concerns about TDE R14 and SRU

From: "Timothy Pearson" <kb9vqf@...>
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 00:05:55 -0600
>>> > Hi everyone,
>>> >
>>> > I have a few concerns about TDE R14 and SRU
>>> >
>>> > It seems to me that SRU has next to perfect stability,
>>> features
>>> > and reliability, while R14 is not there yet.
>>> > By looking at this page:  ,
>>> 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 SRU. Everything works as it should in 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 well as making a new ''outside'' on top of an outdated car is not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 changing everything under the hood and keeping the old outdated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
>> 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:  In other words,
that bug would still be open if the renaming projects had not been