Why not an official KDE-3.5.x repository?

[dep]

I've just spent most of a day upgrading to Jaunty so as to get some hardware support that was lacking in earlier versions. And I am accustomed to and use KDE, as I have since the day 1.0 was released in July 1998, with the exception of about a week giving Gnome a try some years ago. KDE is important to me and to the work I do.

Upon rebooting following the upgrade, I got a KDE-4.x desktop. While I m sure that some like, perhaps love, it, I was aghast. Perhaps there is a reason for the overarching changes, but to me it seemed almost an advertisement for the familiarity and ease of use of Vista. Again, just my impression and your mileage may and probably will vary.

After some fiddling and hacking, I was able to get a KDE-3.5.10 desktop running on the machine I upgraded. It came from an inexplicably *unofficial* repository.

At this point, there is more difference in user interface between KDE-3.x and KDE-4.x than there is between KDE-3.x and Gnome. I do not know, nor do I much care, what inspired or possessed -- your choice -- the developers to depart from the familiar KDE UI . But it seems unconscionable that the option to stick with KDE-3.x is no longer officially possible. I suspect that if both were offered, the vast majority of users would either go with KDE-3.x or would install both.

Why, then, the decision to drop KDE-3.x? Loyal KDE users are ill-served by it.

Please, put it back!

[DracoTB]

Re: Why not an official KDE-3.5.x repository?

At a guess I'd say that 3.5 is no longer supported by the developers of KDE and there really is no point in putting software into a Linux distribution that is no longer supported by its developers. The same thing happens with Windows and MacOS.

[sabbas]

Re: Why not an official KDE-3.5.x repository?

I have to agree with you. I have been replacing Windows XP on many PCs (mostly businesses) and was using KUBUNTU for this, but no more. What has been (is) happening is the end users apply the updates and see that a new version is available, they like what they have so they choose to upgrade. What they get is NOT (in their opinion) an improvement on what they had. The latest customer of mine said he can't find his way around and wants to go back to the previous version, describing 4.X as a kind of Mac meets Vista "thing". He also said that if he knew this (KDE 4.X) was going to be installed he would not have opted to "upgrade". I've installed GNOME but all that seems to do is put a GNOMEish look on the KDE 4.x apps.
We need a straightforward means of replacing the KDE 4.X desktop with 3.X, either that or we backup the data and wipe out the "upgrade", replacing it with the same release but with GNOME, which (as far as changes in how the UI works) is not such a huge kick in the head.

[flarson]

Re: Why not an official KDE-3.5.x repository?

I know it is not official, but sabbas have you seen http://apt.pearsoncomputing.net/. It would probably work for your current needs at least. Who know where we will be in a year.

[sabbas]

Re: Why not an official KDE-3.5.x repository?

At a guess I'd say that 3.5 is no longer supported by the developers of KDE and there really is no point in putting software into a Linux distribution that is no longer supported by its developers. The same thing happens with Windows and MacOS.

Unless of course it forks and gets supported again... which while highly improbable, is still nonetheless possible. As for the same thing happening with Windows and MacOS it is more true for Windows than Mac.
The Mac OS is prettier than it used to be but fundamentally it works in much the same manner as it always did,
Even the Windows Vista UI was not a complete shift in the fundamentals, but it changed enough that many people don't like it. Common complaints I hear are that the file manager is not what they want, they find the file search facility and the start menu confusing, for example a user clicks on the power button to turn off their machine and it doesn't turn off. All in all they are not happy campers.. which has made switching them to Linux MUCH easier.
Anyway, I'm just the messenger. The people who I've converted to Linux using KDE 3.5X dislike KDE 4.X, they much prefer GNOME over the new KDE, so GNOME it is. These same people would go back to KDE 3.X in a heartbeat, and I would oblige them if there was a simple way to accomplish this task; sInce there isn't, GNOME will be installed instead. Konqueror will also be installed as "a" file manager (but not as the default (and why is Dolphin installed when Konqueror is installed?)). The typical XP convert using later versions of KDE 3.X seem to like Dolphin (it's shiny and they have never had anything more powerful than Windows explorer so they can be excused for this), but when GNOME installs they will be using Nautilus, which should be interesting.

[sabbas]

Re: Why not an official KDE-3.5.x repository?

I know it is not official, but sabbas have you seen http://apt.pearsoncomputing.net/. It would probably work for your current needs at least. Who know where we will be in a year.

Yes, and that is being considered. In the end though, for business users, GNOME will probably win out.

[dep]

Re: Why not an official KDE-3.5.x repository?

The Pearson repository is the unofficial repository of which I spoke above. It is irritating that it is not an official repository; doubly so that it gets nuked from acceptable repositories at upgrade so that upgrading involves installing what you don't want, then going in to the new system and manually adding the repositories, then getting a new gpg key and installing that, and only then being able to d/l 3.5.x.

It is kind of insulting to many loyal users, especially because it could be so easily solved.

Seems that way to me, anyway.

[Fintan]

Re: Why not an official KDE-3.5.x repository?

This subject has been discussed pro and con ad nausea so I won't go into it here (again).

On the kubuntu.org start page you have this:

Kubuntu Jaunty KDE 3 Remix Release Candidate
Submitted on Sun, 2009-04-19

A remix of our Jaunty Release Candidate has been made with KDE 3 packages. The main focus of this remix is to keep the mature, stable, and familiar KDE3.5 desktop environment available for easy installation and use. Along the way, various bugs have been fixed, and small enhancements added, see the release notes page for information and where to download.

with a link:
http://www.kubuntu.org/node/77

Maybe that will help

[dep]

Re: Why not an official KDE-3.5.x repository?

right. problem is in the area of upgrading, which is of course one of the strengths of kubuntu. this is at least problematic using the kde-3.5 remix CD. the whole process could be made easy with the choice to include a kde-3.5 repository at upgrade time and a choice of kde-3.5, kde-4.x, or both. this would be trivial to do. and to the extent that this all is supposed to be of service to users, it would achieve that end.

but yes, for new installs, one may seek out and, with not undue difficulty, find iso files of jaunty that include kde-3.5.

as to kde itself, the two really should be forked, because kde-3.5 provides a place for serious production, while 4.2 provides many bells and whistles but is sufficiently different that users who have employed kde will be at minimum blindsided and maybe worse.

it is such an obvious choice to maintain and provide a kde-3.5 desktop that the decision not to do so is an example of why some are so frightened of free and open-source software.

[claydoh]

Re: Why not an official KDE-3.5.x repository?

It's been, what, a year since the last KDE3 update? Still no one has forked, as anyone is free to do. No one anywhere really has jumped in to do so. So I won't comment any more on that tired subject.

I will repeat the tired, old story that Kubuntu does not have the will or manpower to maintain 2 different KDE version. They made that decision during the early stages of Intrepid's dev cycle. We just now got Tim Pearson into the fold, so to speak with his KDE3 work. The devs are free to do what they think is best, and we are free to choose what distro we want to use, or modify it as we see fit. it is both the upside and the downside to f/os software

It is NOT an easy task to offer the choice of DE in a distro that is a single-cd distro by nature, and add in the required security fixes needed for an unmaintained set of code make kde3, though available, completely unsupported just as KDE4.2 in Intrepid is.

It all boils down to a lot of noise way, way to late. There is no going back, unfortunately

[dep]

Re: Why not an official KDE-3.5.x repository?

Fair enough, though I disagree with the decisions or the suggestion that because something was decided a year ago we're stuck with it forever.

What is *surely* trivial is allowing the user the opportunity to add repositories at the beginning of the upgrade, so that Tim Pearson's KDE-3.5.x repository can be involved in the upgrade from the beginning.

The lack of choice in this regard really is an unconscionable disregard of the user. Though KDE development has a considerable history of a kind of love-hate relationship with users. Alas.

[claydoh]

Re: Why not an official KDE-3.5.x repository?

If it were supported, then maybe, but it would still add to the size of the cd at best, as well as another layer to add to the upgrader - which is an Ubuntu-specific tool. As Canonical/Ubuntu/don't officially support it, it has to be added by the user (not hard to do at all)

Lack of choice with all the distros out there there is plenty of choice.

<repeat-mode>A distro has the freedom to choose what it thinks is best for itself and its users, that's what a distro is for. That is why there are many distros out there. Kubuntu is not some corporation sitting inside some offices high up in a skyscraper or something. Kubuntu's team is a small group of beautiful people creating what we think is the best KDE distro out there, a showcase for the best KDE has offer. </repeat-mode>

Consider this rehashing closed, please