Hi all,
Apologies if this has already been discussed on the list (I did search 2010 archives), I'm curious about people's thoughts on a modular version KDE for Fedora?
That is, where one can install a basic KDE and then only the components they want - packages are broken up into individual programs, like "kontact" rather "kdepim". Of course, this doesn't stop us from still using groups/meta-packages to install everything, or a collection of programs (like @kde-pim perhaps?).
The benefit is the ability to have a more custom, smaller, faster, snappier desktop. It also makes KDE applications more attractive for non-KDE desktop users (they don't need to install a dozen programs to get the one they need).
If you've never used a modular KDE system before, I highly recommend you give it a shot!
Thoughts?
-c
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 6:58 PM, Chris Smart mail@christophersmart.com wrote:
Hi all,
Apologies if this has already been discussed on the list (I did search 2010 archives), I'm curious about people's thoughts on a modular version KDE for Fedora?
That is, where one can install a basic KDE and then only the components they want - packages are broken up into individual programs, like "kontact" rather "kdepim"
Considering the nature of Kontact, that seems like a bad example.
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Arthur Pemberton pemboa@gmail.com wrote:
Considering the nature of Kontact, that seems like a bad example.
OK, s/kontact/kmail/g If someone just wanted bloglio for example, they also get akregator, kmail, knode, knotes, kontact and korganiser.
Or as another example, kget, kopete, kppp, krdc, krfb which are all in the kdenetwork meta-package. One can't just install kopete, for example.
A user also can't install ksnapshot without also getting kamera, kcolorchooser, kolourpaint4, kruler and okular.
-c
On Mon 30 August 2010 16:53:42 Chris Smart wrote:
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Arthur Pemberton pemboa@gmail.com wrote:
Considering the nature of Kontact, that seems like a bad example.
OK, s/kontact/kmail/g If someone just wanted bloglio for example, they also get akregator, kmail, knode, knotes, kontact and korganiser.
Or as another example, kget, kopete, kppp, krdc, krfb which are all in the kdenetwork meta-package. One can't just install kopete, for example.
A user also can't install ksnapshot without also getting kamera, kcolorchooser, kolourpaint4, kruler and okular.
I thought about doing that, and it was proposed as a solution in the creation of the KDE Netbook Spin, but hasn't really gained much traction I'm afraid
-c _______________________________________________ kde mailing list kde@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kde New to KDE4? - get help from http://userbase.kde.org
2010/8/31 Ryan Rix ry@n.rix.si:
I thought about doing that, and it was proposed as a solution in the creation of the KDE Netbook Spin, but hasn't really gained much traction I'm afraid
Never mind then :-) For people who just install the full KDE and are happy to run with that, it won't be particularly attractive. For those who install a base Fedora and build up what they want from there however, it's super awesome.
-c
On Tuesday, August 31, 2010 02:48:02 Chris Smart wrote:
Never mind then :-) For people who just install the full KDE and are happy to run with that, it won't be particularly attractive. For those who install a base Fedora and build up what they want from there however, it's super awesome.
The idea makes sense in principle, and IIRC it was already proposed some time ago. My memory on this is a bit vague, but I think the main response was that splitting packages into more smaller ones would be a too big burden for current undermanned Fedora KDE maintainers.
If you are willing to give them a hand and repackage 20 packages into 200 smaller ones and keep maintaining them all, I don't recall any arguments against. Feel free to join the KDE SIG, talk to the maintainers about it and help with the heavy-lifting. :-)
Best, :-) Marko
Chris Smart wrote:
Hi all,
Apologies if this has already been discussed on the list (I did search 2010 archives), I'm curious about people's thoughts on a modular version KDE for Fedora?
It has, now I need to dig it up again. :)
The long and short of it was that we concluded that while it would add a lot of flexbility, it would also add a lot of complexity that our (current) users didn't care for... as well as an added burden to packaging.
That said, we're slowly, but surely, moving that direction anyway, in order to acommodate small-from-factor devices, like netbooks, but it'll take time to get there.
-- Rex
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 10:13 PM, Rex Dieter rdieter@math.unl.edu wrote:
The long and short of it was that we concluded that while it would add a lot of flexbility, it would also add a lot of complexity that our (current) users didn't care for... as well as an added burden to packaging.
Thanks Rex, I think that's fair enough.
That said, we're slowly, but surely, moving that direction anyway, in order to acommodate small-from-factor devices, like netbooks, but it'll take time to get there.
Sounds good. How can one help out in this regard? I don't have a lot of experience in building packages for Fedora, but I'm keen to learn. Is there any documentation on how you build the kde-redhat packages?
-c
Rex Dieter wrote:
The long and short of it was that we concluded that while it would add a lot of flexbility, it would also add a lot of complexity that our (current) users didn't care for... as well as an added burden to packaging.
In addition to what Rex said above, it would also cause massive bloat to update metadata, hurting even people who don't run KDE at all (at every single update push, even those which don't touch KDE packages, you still have to download all the metadata each time it changes), and possibly adding up to a lot more bandwidth than what you save by not downloading some apps.
All this has been pointed out in previous threads. It would really help if users would read the f… uh… fine ;-) mailing list archives rather than asking the same questions again and again!
Kevin Kofler
On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 3:59 AM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kofler@chello.at wrote:
In addition to what Rex said above, it would also cause massive bloat to update metadata, hurting even people who don't run KDE at all (at every single update push, even those which don't touch KDE packages, you still have to download all the metadata each time it changes), and possibly adding up to a lot more bandwidth than what you save by not downloading some apps.
Interesting thought, I wonder what the consequences would actually be. Anyway, Rex said that we're moving towards a more modular KDE anyway, because of the ability to run them on netbooks, etc. Will be interesting to see if this becomes a problem.
All this has been pointed out in previous threads. It would really help if users would read the f… uh… fine ;-) mailing list archives rather than asking the same questions again and again!
As mentioned, I did go through all threads for 2010..
-c
On Monday, September 06, 2010 01:19:13 am Chris Smart wrote:
On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 3:59 AM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kofler@chello.at wrote:
In addition to what Rex said above, it would also cause massive bloat to update metadata, hurting even people who don't run KDE at all (at every single update push, even those which don't touch KDE packages, you still have to download all the metadata each time it changes), and possibly adding up to a lot more bandwidth than what you save by not downloading some apps.
Interesting thought, I wonder what the consequences would actually be. Anyway, Rex said that we're moving towards a more modular KDE anyway, because of the ability to run them on netbooks, etc. Will be interesting to see if this becomes a problem.
We are moving towards more likely "logical units" instead of complete splits - like minimal packages that makes sense etc. On the other hand - upstream wants to aim more on individual applications instead of one big packages (but still packaged together).
R.
All this has been pointed out in previous threads. It would really help if users would read the f… uh… fine ;-) mailing list archives rather than asking the same questions again and again!
As mentioned, I did go through all threads for 2010..
-c _______________________________________________ kde mailing list kde@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kde New to KDE4? - get help from http://userbase.kde.org
Am Montag 06 September 2010 schrieb Chris Smart:
All this has been pointed out in previous threads. It would really help if users would read the f… uh… fine ;-) mailing list archives rather than asking the same questions again and again!
As mentioned, I did go through all threads for 2010..
Please have a look in this thread from Nov 2009:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/kde/2009-November/004661.html
2010/9/15 Sebastian Vahl deadbabylon@googlemail.com:
Please have a look in this thread from Nov 2009:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/kde/2009-November/004661.html
Seems pretty clear.
Danke. -c
-
Arthur Pemberton -
Chris Smart -
Jaroslav Reznik -
Kevin Kofler -
Marko Vojinovic -
Rex Dieter -
Ryan Rix -
Sebastian Vahl