FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Ubuntu > Kubuntu Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 12-06-2009, 06:42 PM
Harald Sitter
 
Default Q: Why does Kubuntu exist?

Hullos!

In my recent wave of thinking about Kubuntu and how to make it clearer what
exactly we are doing, I came to wonder why Kubuntu actually exists.

Now, let me explain what I mean by that. Every project (every useful one
anyway) is there to solve some problem or improve something, simply put a
general justification for spending time on it. Kubuntu, being a useful project,
must have some general justificaiton of existance, some problem, desire or
similar.

What I'd like to find out is exactly what Kubuntu is supposed to archive, and
why other OS or distributions failed at it. Not so much by how we want to
archive it or by what means we (want to) measure the successfulness of this.

If everyone writes a couple of lines (some would call this brainstorming ),
it might be easier to find a general definition as to why Kubuntu is existing
and why it is good that it is existing.

Thanks.
--
Harald Sitter
Kubuntu Core Developer
http://www.kubuntu.org
--
kubuntu-devel mailing list
kubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
 
Old 12-07-2009, 02:49 AM
Jonathan Jesse
 
Default Q: Why does Kubuntu exist?

On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 2:42 PM, Harald Sitter <apachelogger@ubuntu.com> wrote:

Hullos!



In my recent wave of thinking about Kubuntu and how to make it clearer what

exactly we are doing, I came to wonder why Kubuntu actually exists.



Now, let me explain what I mean by that. Every project (every useful one

anyway) is there to solve some problem or improve something, simply put a

general justification for spending time on it. Kubuntu, being a useful project,

must have some general justificaiton of existance, some problem, desire or

similar.



What I'd like to find out is exactly what Kubuntu is supposed to archive, and

why other OS or distributions failed at it. Not so much by how we want to

archive it or by what means we (want to) measure the successfulness of this.



If everyone writes a couple of lines (some would call this brainstorming ),

it might be easier to find a general definition as to why Kubuntu is existing

and why it is good that it is existing.



Thanks.

--

Harald Sitter

Kubuntu Core Developer

http://www.kubuntu.org


--

kubuntu-devel mailing list

kubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com

Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel



At one time I thought the goals was to make Kubuntu the very best KDE distro as close to core* KDE as possible, that Kubuntu was a close to vanilla KDE as possible.* Howe I think this has since changed a lot of it due to Kubuntu moving closer to a core OS for Canonical it is moving to a KDE version of Ubuntu, with KDE as the core (including things like Ayatana, possibly a Kubuntu One, etc)


It's not just KDE on top of Ubuntu though, I've tried several other distros and it seems like KDE is an afetrthought where this is not the case with* Kubuntu.

It's late so I hope this makes sense

--
kubuntu-devel mailing list
kubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
 
Old 12-07-2009, 05:00 AM
pan shizhu
 
Default Q: Why does Kubuntu exist?

On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 3:42 AM, Harald Sitter <apachelogger@ubuntu.com> wrote:
> Hullos!
>
> In my recent wave of thinking about Kubuntu and how to make it clearer what
> exactly we are doing, I came to wonder why Kubuntu actually exists.

For me, kubuntu is a debian-based distribution which has kde as the
default desktop.

Most linux-based distribution need repositories, the popular ubuntu
has lots of repository mirrors, (there're hundreds of ubuntu
repository mirrors in china, much more than that of any other linux
distros, many of them are not listed in official ubuntu but we can
search for them from local news, many university and corperation have
local ubuntu mirrors), the popular ubuntu mirrors enables you access
the ubuntu official repository fast. Having a fast mirror is very
important for ubuntu users.

That is the reason why ppa isn't much useful for many users, ppa
repository will not be syncronized to local mirrors, so those who use
local mirror have no access of ppa, they won't even have the KDE 4.3.4
release...

--
kubuntu-devel mailing list
kubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
 
Old 12-07-2009, 03:22 PM
Clay Weber
 
Default Q: Why does Kubuntu exist?

On Sunday 06 December 2009 02:42:57 pm Harald Sitter wrote:
> Hullos!
>
> In my recent wave of thinking about Kubuntu and how to make it clearer what
> exactly we are doing, I came to wonder why Kubuntu actually exists.
>
> Now, let me explain what I mean by that. Every project (every useful one
> anyway) is there to solve some problem or improve something, simply put a
> general justification for spending time on it. Kubuntu, being a useful
> project, must have some general justificaiton of existance, some problem,
> desire or similar.
>
> What I'd like to find out is exactly what Kubuntu is supposed to archive,
> and why other OS or distributions failed at it. Not so much by how we want
> to archive it or by what means we (want to) measure the successfulness of
> this.
>
> If everyone writes a couple of lines (some would call this brainstorming
> ), it might be easier to find a general definition as to why Kubuntu is
> existing and why it is good that it is existing.
>
> Thanks.
>
For me, we have to go back in history a bit, which is why my thoughts may be
a bit different than some.

For me, Kubuntu brought Ubuntu's sense of creating a polished cohesive
desktop, among other things. to those who choose KDE over Gnome.

Look at this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kubuntu#Releases
specifically some of the notes about some of the releases. Note the things that
were added to the distro not part of the official KDE releases of the day (and
are now part of it). Also note the unmentioned things, such as what was done
to customize the desktop, like as the menu layouts and all that wonderful
artwork.

All these additions and tweaks were what brought me to Kubuntu to begin with.
I had less to muck with to get things the way I liked it. Oh, yeah, it also
Just Works

Now we have a wonderful, new KDE4 and we seem to want to have it 'plain' or
'vanilla' (ie =boring). I don't think this promotes the capabilities of KDE or
showcases anything. The netbook version, however, seems to be doing just
that........

Hopefully this make some sense.

--
Clay Weber
http://kubuntuforums.net
http://flyballmaine.com
http://emacdogsports.com

--
kubuntu-devel mailing list
kubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
 
Old 12-07-2009, 08:27 PM
Dotan Cohen
 
Default Q: Why does Kubuntu exist?

2009/12/7 Aurélien Gâteau <aurelien.gateau@canonical.com>:
> Harald Sitter wrote:
>> Hullos!
>>
>> In my recent wave of thinking about Kubuntu and how to make it clearer what
>> exactly we are doing, I came to wonder why Kubuntu actually exists.
>
> For me it would be: bring to KDE users the same level of polish and
> attention to detail Ubuntu brings to GNOME users (because I believe
> that's the main reason behind Ubuntu success: a greater attention to
> detail).
>

I only wish that were the case. Kubuntu has traditionally been a mess,
though 9.10 is a bit better than the past. Ubuntu's strong point is
their high level of polish in all default apps, not just Gnome, and
that level of polish does not carry over to Kubuntu. I really don't
know why I stick with Kubuntu, but I do. Probably for the same reason
that other s stick with Windows: it's not really good, but it does the
job and it's what I know. Maybe I should give Mandriva and Suse a
spin.


--
Dotan Cohen

http://what-is-what.com
http://gibberish.co.il

--
kubuntu-devel mailing list
kubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
 
Old 12-07-2009, 08:28 PM
Yiannis Belias
 
Default Q: Why does Kubuntu exist?

Clay Weber wrote
...
> All these additions and tweaks were what brought me to Kubuntu to begin
> with. I had less to muck with to get things the way I liked it. Oh, yeah,
> it also Just Works
>
> Now we have a wonderful, new KDE4 and we seem to want to have it 'plain'
> or 'vanilla' (ie =boring). I don't think this promotes the capabilities of
> KDE or showcases anything. The netbook version, however, seems to be doing
> just that........
>
> Hopefully this make some sense.
>

Hi,
It does, but just a clarification, please.
Customising/rebranding the *installation* of the KDE SC (SC == Software Compilation )
is really cool, can be a creative process and help the users to adjust on the new 4.4 environment.
So, yes "vanilla" KDE install could be boring (if that can even be said about the default
KDE eye Kandy!)
What the kubuntu devs are trying to do is to maintain as less kubuntu specific
patches as possible, so that the *code* of kubuntu-KDE be as much "vanilla" as
possible. This is a really good thing IMHO (and has been discussed extensively I suppose).

So, wouldn't it be fun, if the last couple months before the Lucid release we had a competition
among the kubuntu users for the most popular/usefull activities and kubuntu ships with the
four-five highest rated?
[ You do know what activities are, how to create and switch between them, don't you? ]

Also, trying bug#2 at launchpad gives me a 'no page' message. Is it reserved?
I think it should become:
Bug #2: Ubuntu does not use KDE SC for it's default Desktop environment...

For the why does kubuntu exist question: Well, I came to ubuntu for it's "just works"
philosophy and because I always wanted to try out a debian based distro.
Obviously the first thing I needed to know is how well KDE runs on ubuntu... (hence kubuntu!)
So for me Kubuntu exists, because Ubuntu exists. (Hope that makes sence)

Cheers!
Yiannis

--
Yiannis Belias <jonnyb@hol.gr> `
Homepage [http://users.hol.gr/~jonnyb/video] ' .
GNU+LINUX: ' '
IN A WORLD WITHOUT FENCES WHO NEEDS GATES? . *

--
kubuntu-devel mailing list
kubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
 
Old 12-08-2009, 01:48 AM
Richard JOHNSON
 
Default Q: Why does Kubuntu exist?

On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 11:27:18PM +0200, Dotan Cohen wrote:
[...]
> I only wish that were the case. Kubuntu has traditionally been a mess,
> though 9.10 is a bit better than the past. Ubuntu's strong point is
> their high level of polish in all default apps, not just Gnome, and
> that level of polish does not carry over to Kubuntu. I really don't
> know why I stick with Kubuntu, but I do. Probably for the same reason
> that other s stick with Windows: it's not really good, but it does the
> job and it's what I know. Maybe I should give Mandriva and Suse a
> spin.

Pretty much all of the default apps are from GNOME, but the way they are
released is different from KDE. I would also like to know how you have come
to the conclusion that Kubuntu has traditionally been a mess? I know Jaunty
and Karmic had rough spots, but that doesn't warrant "traditionally been a
mess." I am sorry, but the attitude you displayed in your response,
attitude as in talking down Kubuntu without a single valid issue pointed
out, but maybe you should try Mandriva or Suse. Honestly I would give Arch
a spin, as I find it a really good KDE implementation, possibly the best
out there right now.

--
Name| Richard JOHNSON
Title| Developer
WWW| http://www.ubuntu.com
Email| nixternal@ubuntu.com
GnuPG| 3578 0981 A21D D662 2A96 7623 F4C1 838C D8C4 4738
--
kubuntu-devel mailing list
kubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
 
Old 12-08-2009, 02:11 AM
Tres Finocchiaro
 
Default Q: Why does Kubuntu exist?

> Maybe I should give Mandriva and Suse a spin
@Dotan: *Sorry to go off-topic here, but*Kubuntu -- with all of its known issues -- is much, much better than Mandriva for many reasons. *One is that Mandriva tries to make KDE 4 look like KDE 3.5 and fails entirely at offering an innovative KDE 4 desktop. *Another is there's no easy package manager for getting new applications. *The one and only advantage I can see to using Mandriva is it comes with Firefox bundled as the default browser. *I have used Mandriva extensively and Kubuntu is much more functional and fun in my opinion. *I can't speak for SuSE.

-Tres
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 3:09 AM, Tres Finocchiaro <tres.finocchiaro@gmail.com> wrote:






--
- Tres.Finocchiaro@gmail.com





--
- Tres.Finocchiaro@gmail.com

--
kubuntu-devel mailing list
kubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
 
Old 12-08-2009, 02:27 AM
Darkwing Duck
 
Default Q: Why does Kubuntu exist?

On Sunday 06 December 2009 11:42:57 am Harald Sitter wrote:
> Hullos!
>
> In my recent wave of thinking about Kubuntu and how to make it clearer what
> exactly we are doing, I came to wonder why Kubuntu actually exists.
>
> Now, let me explain what I mean by that. Every project (every useful one
> anyway) is there to solve some problem or improve something, simply put a
> general justification for spending time on it. Kubuntu, being a useful
> project, must have some general justificaiton of existance, some problem,
> desire or similar.
>
> What I'd like to find out is exactly what Kubuntu is supposed to archive,
> and why other OS or distributions failed at it. Not so much by how we want
> to archive it or by what means we (want to) measure the successfulness of
> this.
>
> If everyone writes a couple of lines (some would call this brainstorming
> ), it might be easier to find a general definition as to why Kubuntu is
> existing and why it is good that it is existing.
>
> Thanks.
>
Okay, to bring this back to the first question, I think I have a strange
perspective. I was a 4 year user of GNOME and have switched to KDE with
Jaunty.

The reason I made the switch and I talk about with my LoCo is that I feel that
KDE give you more computing and less poking through what GNOME thinks you
want. To explain I got tired of trying to do a simple task to have GNOME try
three things prior to me getting the result that I wanted.

Now, for a new user to Linux this may not be as "easy" but, I think that the
layout of KDE is setup better for a new user switching over from windows just
from pure layout. It has less of the "mac" feel that GNOME has (I know that
everything can be customized however, I'm talking default settings here).

Another point at least from KDE4 is the use of Widgets. I happen to think that
using widgets to be more productive falls under the "more time computing"
category again.

Overall I feel that what KDE is trying to do is get back to basic computing
and yet, making it very sleek and sexy at the same time.

This is why I switched from GNOME and will not leave KDE... EVER.

DW

--
kubuntu-devel mailing list
kubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
 
Old 12-08-2009, 03:38 AM
Andrea Canidio
 
Default Q: Why does Kubuntu exist?

Hi Everybody,

I think Xubuntu could be a useful reference point here. If you go on the
Ubuntu website, under "derivatives", "Xubuntu", you read something that
roughly says "Xubuntu is made for less-powerful computers. Therefore it uses
XFCE". In other words, a clear goal, and a clear tool.

If you then click on "Kubuntu", it roughly say "Kubuntu is Ubuntu + KDE" few
times with different words. It follows a somehow random list of softwares and
features. Let me be clear, I don't mean to blame the person who wrote the
page. The problem is the goal of the project, or, as Harald said, why it
exists, is not clear.

Also, KDE is a tool, not a goal. Answering "Kubuntu's goal is to bring KDE to
Ubuntu" makes is sound like it is a religion!

Finally, IMO Kubuntu gives the user the power to customize every bit of the
desktop, and at the same times provides a smooth installation experience and
the best hardware recognition around. In short, all the power, and no hassle.
To achieve this, it uses Ubuntu and KDE.

Cheers!

Andrea


On Sunday 06 December 2009 02:42:57 pm Harald Sitter wrote:
> Hullos!
>
> In my recent wave of thinking about Kubuntu and how to make it clearer what
> exactly we are doing, I came to wonder why Kubuntu actually exists.
>
> Now, let me explain what I mean by that. Every project (every useful one
> anyway) is there to solve some problem or improve something, simply put a
> general justification for spending time on it. Kubuntu, being a useful
> project, must have some general justificaiton of existance, some problem,
> desire or similar.
>
> What I'd like to find out is exactly what Kubuntu is supposed to archive,
> and why other OS or distributions failed at it. Not so much by how we want
> to archive it or by what means we (want to) measure the successfulness of
> this.
>
> If everyone writes a couple of lines (some would call this brainstorming
> ), it might be easier to find a general definition as to why Kubuntu is
> existing and why it is good that it is existing.
>
> Thanks.
>

--
kubuntu-devel mailing list
kubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 08:03 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org