Obtuse code was Re: [ale] Ernie Ball says F.Y.

[Greg]

I would agree with this.  Part of the whole argument/problem is the "way of
the world".  Anytime new stuff comes out, unless it has as it's goal
complete compatibility with previous stuff, it has made for problems with
those folks using stuff that depend on it.  This is true with machinery,
organizational procedures, or software.  Even with a closed, tightly
controlled project like OpenBSD, who has as it's goal backward
compatibility, many man-hours are spent in backward compatibility coding and
bug fixing, an acceptance that there is not enough resources to focus on
adding new features without breaking backward compatibility, and sometimes
the realization that it is impossible.

I would say that KDE is better at overcoming this fact than Gnome.  You have
to realize that the whole thing is inter-related and a package deal and not
a collection of the traditional Unix single-program/single purpose programs.
KDE and Gnome have more in common with a MS/Office type C++ framework than
the traditional Unix "kernel + add this + add that" structure of modular or
"building block" programs written in C that only require a C compiler for
that particular processor.  I think that perhaps due to Gnome's being the
first one on the scene, it (and related programs based on it) is more
fragmented than KDE.  I think also that since there are more developer tools
dedicated to KDE ( theKompany's Studio and Quanta) KDE devilment has been
more compliant with the underlying libs than Gnome.  This compliance is the
bedrock to sound independently written programs working in the first place.
However when those libs change, then it is up to the lib writers/stewards to
work on the compliance - and even then sometimes it can be near impossible.
Look at MS - they who control *everything* on the pc, cannot pull it off
sometimes (and I am talking the coding part and not the marketing/business
induced problems).

I think that each paradigm has it's place due to the complementary nature of
each's strength's and weaknesses.  A geeky server solution would probably
lean to the latter while a desktop solution would lean to the "whole
enchilada" package.  I am just glad that there is that choice.  A paradigm
of non-changes will get left behind - look at Sun Microsystems and Solaris.


Greg

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ale-admin at ale.org [mailto:ale-admin at ale.org]On Behalf Of Jim
> Philips
> Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2003 12:43 PM
> To: ale at ale.org
> Subject: Re: Obtuse code was Re: [ale] Ernie Ball says F.Y.
>
>
> Christopher Ness wrote:
> > I wish Freshmeat--or
> >
> >>somebody--would rate open source programs for complexity of
> >>dependencies. A system like:
> >>
> >>standard Gnome2 + _______________________________
> >>standard KDE +    _______________________________
> >
> >
> > Which standard KDE - its one of the worst! Nothing from
> previous versions will
> > compile on current versions and warning will say "version 2.2
> or better" and
> > not work on 2.2.1.
>
> I have to disagree on this. With KDE3, if you install compatible
> versions of QT, arts, kdebase and kdelibs, you should be able to compile
> and run any KDE3 program. With Gnome, you never know when you're going
> to have to add a new package--or another 5 new ones--to get a single new
> program to run. Look at the way Gnome's released and then look at the
> way KDE's released. KDE puts everything needed in to the four packages I
> mention above (although the idiots at RedHat break these down into lots
> of smaller packages). Also, I'm still looking forward to the day I can
> delete all Gnome 1.2 packages and forget about it. But that day doesn't
> seem to be coming anytime soon. Whenever I go to delete them, I find
> about a dozen programs that still depend on them. And this after
> converting Gimp and Mozilla to Gnome 2. Look on Freshmeat and you still
> find dozens of programs built against the old Gnome libs, including
> GnuCash, which is one of the few Gnome programs I consider to be
> essential and best of breed. Anybody serious about KDE converted
> completely to KDE3 a long time ago.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>

_______________________________________________
Ale mailing list
Ale at ale.org
http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale