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 User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-15-2008, 08:21 PM
Derek Broughton
 
Default KDE 4.0.0!

John DeCarlo wrote:


> While it is true that you can use the file:/// approach in any web browser
> for file browsing, IE has never been able to do any sort of file
> management. No moving of files, no deleting of files, etc.
>
> That capability has always been separate, whether in File Manager or
> Windows Explorer.
>
> In other words, the two capabilities have *never* been joined together in
> the Windows OS, as I said.
|
No. Just plain no. I _always_ use IE on Windows for all my file browsing.
Not file:///, just C:.... It's got moving, it's got deleting, it's got
dragondrop. Under the hood, possibly it really does invoke a different
program, but as far as the user can see, it's one program. Like Konqueror.
--
derek


--
kubuntu-users mailing list
kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users
 
Old 01-15-2008, 08:24 PM
Derek Broughton
 
Default KDE 4.0.0!

Bernhard Breinbauer wrote:

> On Tuesday 15 January 2008 wrote Derek Broughton:
>> Yes, David is being a little rude, but you seem to be
>> intentionally telling us all to just "live with it", and it's no surprise
>> if it rubs us the wrong way.
>
> As long as nobody steps up and does something about the current situation,
> I guess you will have to live with it :-)

Absolutely - that's why I said everybody would be happier if he'd just
ignore the users, rather than apparently intentionally irritate us.

>> It _would_ have made much more sense to
>> users if both Dolphin and Konqueror had continued to use the same kpart.
>> To cripple konqueror by giving it only _some_ of Dolphin's features, and
>> not even giving Dolphin all the features Konqueror used to have is going
>> to hurt some users and annoy far more.
>
> Konqueror and Dolphin are still using the same kpart, but the one which
> originates in the development of Dolphin.

That's ok - but by all accounts the kpart is far less than the complete
Dolphin.

> Some people still invest time into Konqueror as file manager, so I don't
> believe it will die. But as long as not more people step up and work on
> it, it may stay in a rather shabby state.

From what I've seen so far, "rather shabby state" is still an improvement
over the Dolphin kpart.
--
derek


--
kubuntu-users mailing list
kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users
 
Old 01-15-2008, 08:28 PM
Derek Broughton
 
Default KDE 4.0.0!

D. Michael McIntyre wrote:

> On Monday 14 January 2008, Derek Broughton wrote:
>> It's not "stupid" - how are they going to be able to promise to keep KDE
>> 3.5 maintained for 3 years? (or is it 5?)
>
> Well, since you've raised this seemingly very reasonable point several
> times,
> I've actually had a bit of a think about it. Dapper is the current LTS,
> and
> it still has some really old version of KDE. How have they managed to
> maintain *that* for so long?
>
> I'm not a KDE developer, so I don't have insider knowledge, but I
> sincerely doubt Canonical is getting any special upstream help with
> maintaining KDE 3.5.2, so it's just as dead and forgotten as the current
> 3.5 variant will be soon.

However, Canonical has to package security fixes to 3.5.2 for another 5
months. That is generally going to be much easier while upstream is still
packaging those fixes for 3.5.8, than when upstream is packaging them for
4.x. There's a _huge_ code difference with the major version change.
>
> It's probably not as valid an argument as it seems on the surface. More
> likely, they are worried that KDE 4.x will become usable in the interim,
> and users will start making a lot of noise like the noises we've heard
> here
> about "Why can't I install the new Firefox on Dapper?" and so forth. A
> support nightmare.

Well, you're right that _that's_ going to happen.
--
derek


--
kubuntu-users mailing list
kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users
 
Old 01-15-2008, 08:31 PM
Derek Broughton
 
Default KDE 4.0.0!

Richard A. Johnson wrote:

> On Tuesday 15 January 2008, Derek Broughton wrote:
> [...]
> | > KDE 4 was not the reason to drop LTS support for our 3.5.x branch,
> |
> | Of course it was.
>
> You are kidding right? Do you follow development at all? Do you
> communicate on a daily basis with Canonical? I think the answer is
> obvious. The choice to drop LTS was made by Canonical, _NOT_ Kubuntu. Why?
> At the time, the KDE community didn't communicate their future with
> supporting KDE 3.5. It was because of this that Canonical, not any other
> community team, decided that making Kubuntu 8.04 an LTS release may not be
> plausible. I see a lot of people saying how hard could it be to maintain
> KDE 3.5 until 2011, it is hard, especially when your developer community
> is small, and really isn't funded.

So, you're saying that the KDE community is all committed to KDE 4, so
Canonical couldn't expect support for 3.5.

So, in fact, Canonical dropped LTS support because of KDE 4. It's not that
difficult to understand. So, no, I'm not kidding.
--
derek


--
kubuntu-users mailing list
kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users
 
Old 01-15-2008, 09:47 PM
Terence Simpson
 
Default KDE 4.0.0!

Derek Broughton wrote:
> Richard A. Johnson wrote:
>
>
>> On Monday 14 January 2008, Derek Broughton wrote:
>> | Terence Simpson wrote:
>> | > *We* didn't do anything, it's not our decision as to if we are LTS or
>> | > not. It's entirely up to Canonical Ltd.
>> |
>> | Sure *you* did something. You chose to release 8.04 with KDE4, even
>> | though KDE4 is clearly not ready for general release.
>>
>> And we chose to release 7.10 with KDE 4 as well (ie. the KDE 4 Live CD).
>>
>
> It wasn't ready then, and it isn't ready now. I can't see KDE4 being a
> usable desktop come April.
>
>
>> KDE 4 was not the reason to drop LTS support for our 3.5.x branch,
>>
>
> Of course it was.
>
An explanation of that last statement would be appreciated Derek.


--
kubuntu-users mailing list
kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users
 
Old 01-15-2008, 11:51 PM
Derek Broughton
 
Default KDE 4.0.0!

Terence Simpson wrote:

> Derek Broughton wrote:
>> Richard A. Johnson wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Monday 14 January 2008, Derek Broughton wrote:
>>> | Terence Simpson wrote:
>>> | > *We* didn't do anything, it's not our decision as to if we are LTS
>>> | > or not. It's entirely up to Canonical Ltd.
>>> |
>>> | Sure *you* did something. You chose to release 8.04 with KDE4, even
>>> | though KDE4 is clearly not ready for general release.
>>>
>>> And we chose to release 7.10 with KDE 4 as well (ie. the KDE 4 Live CD).
>>>
>>
>> It wasn't ready then, and it isn't ready now. I can't see KDE4 being a
>> usable desktop come April.
>>
>>
>>> KDE 4 was not the reason to drop LTS support for our 3.5.x branch,
>>>
>>
>> Of course it was.
>>
> An explanation of that last statement would be appreciated Derek.

To explain would be flogging a dead horse. I think I've done it three times
so far...
--
derek


--
kubuntu-users mailing list
kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users
 
Old 01-16-2008, 12:09 AM
"Dotan Cohen"
 
Default KDE 4.0.0!

On 15/01/2008, Derek Broughton <news@pointerstop.ca> wrote:
> No. Just plain no. I _always_ use IE on Windows for all my file browsing.
> Not file:///, just C:.... It's got moving, it's got deleting, it's got
> dragondrop. Under the hood, possibly it really does invoke a different
> program, but as far as the user can see, it's one program. Like Konqueror.

I checked today, and with IE 6 the experience is still how I remember it:
1) In Windows Explorer, one can enter a URL and browse there. Some new
buttons show up in the toolbar, but otherwise the UI does not change.
2) In Internet Explorer, one can enter a local path and browse there.
Some new buttons show up in the toolbar, but otherwise the UI does not
change.

With IE7, however, entering a URL into Windows Explorer pops up a new
IE window, with the URL loading. Similarly, entering a local path in
IE pops up a WE window.

Dotan Cohen

http://what-is-what.com
http://gibberish.co.il
א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-*-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
--
kubuntu-users mailing list
kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users
 
Old 01-16-2008, 01:21 AM
"John DeCarlo"
 
Default KDE 4.0.0!

On Jan 15, 2008 4:21 PM, Derek Broughton <news@pointerstop.ca> wrote:


No. *Just plain no. *I _always_ use IE on Windows for all my file browsing.


Believe what you want, then.



--
John DeCarlo, My Views Are My Own
--
kubuntu-users mailing list
kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users
 
Old 01-16-2008, 02:21 AM
"WANSTALL Malcolm"
 
Default KDE 4.0.0!

Terence Simpson wrote:
>Derek Broughton wrote:
>> Richard A. Johnson wrote:
>>

<<SNIP>>

>>> KDE 4 was not the reason to drop LTS support for our 3.5.x branch,
>>>
>>
>> Of course it was.
>>
>An explanation of that last statement would be appreciated Derek.

It has already been explained at least once in this thread...and it made
complete logical sense. If you extrapolate it out, it certainly seems
that KDE4 _was_ the factor that ruled out the LTS...it's the only
logical answer.

-Mal

--
kubuntu-users mailing list
kubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users
 
Old 01-16-2008, 02:25 AM
David McGlone
 
Default KDE 4.0.0!

On Tuesday 15 January 2008 8:42:10 am Derek Broughton wrote:
> Terence Simpson wrote:
> > David McGlone wrote:
> >> On Saturday 12 January 2008 6:14:33 pm Terence Simpson wrote:
> >>> Dotan Cohen wrote:
> >>>> On 12/01/2008, Terence Simpson <stdin@stdin.me.uk> wrote:
> >>>>> Well, Dolphin is the file manager and Konqueror is the Web Browser.
> >>>>> Did you expect the Web Browser to have all the features of a file
> >>>>> manager?
> >>>>
> >>>> Well, yes, as it originally _was_ a file manager before it was a web
> >>>> browser. And so far as I've been led to understand (please RTFM me
> >>>> with information otherwise) Konqueror retains all it's features for
> >>>> KDE4.
> >>>
> >>> No, Konqueror uses the Dolphin KPart to use some file managing
> >>> features. (A KPart is like a plugin, not exactly the same but a decent
> >>> analogy for this)
> >>
> >> first off, let me laugh. LOL I'm sorry man are you new to linux or kde?
> >> Konqueror has been a file manager since I don't know how long, let me
> >> say RH 6.1 or somewhere around there. can anyone verify? Anyway I've
> >> been using konqueror as a file manager for quite a few years I'd say a
> >> good 6 or 8 years and been using linux for around 10 or 12 years. Also
> >> from what I can see, I believe you got it backwards, wouldn't it make
> >> more sense if dolphin was using the konqueror kpart since konqueror has
> >> been around as a file manager for a long long time. Matter of fact all
> >> dolphin is, is a stripped down and re-arranged konqueror with a
> >> different name. :-)
> >
> > To answer your questions:
> > 1) No
> > 2) No
> > 3) Didn't say it wasn't
> > 4) There is no Konqueror KPart for file managing, only the Dolplin KPart.
> >
> > I hope that answered all of those queries.

I didn't receive this reply, unless I accidentally deleted it. Anway yes you
answered them just fine. :-)

<snip>
>Yes, David is being a little rude,

I'm sorry about this. I wasn't trying to sound rude. I was actually laughing
when I replied.

> but you seem to be
> intentionally telling us all to just "live with it", and it's no surprise
> if it rubs us the wrong way.
>
> #3 was not strictly said, but you certainly implied it. #4 is completely
> irrelevant - Konqueror has a file manager kpart, and what it's called
> doesn't matter a bit to the users. It _would_ have made much more sense to
> users if both Dolphin and Konqueror had continued to use the same kpart.
> To cripple konqueror by giving it only _some_ of Dolphin's features, and
> not even giving Dolphin all the features Konqueror used to have is going to
> hurt some users and annoy far more.

This was what I was trying to get around to, but I couldn't stop laughing at
Terence's post where, from what I can tell, sincerely believes konqueror has
been derived from dolphin. Or at least that's how I understood his post.

--
David M.

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

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:06 AM.

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