-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 24 January 2003 10:04, Jesse Kline wrote:
> Is there something that I'm missing here?
they made source-level changes to KDE that make it source and binary
incompatible with other versions while introducing bugs. it's a fork.
for instance, they switched the system tray code out and replaced it with a
new implementation; ok, that's all well and good, and KDE 3.1 even implements
it the same way now. however, when RH did this they didn't bother to send the
patches to the KDE project (it was someone else who ended up noticing it in
one of their later beta releases), so KDE sihpped w/out this and we now get
to answer people's questions about why programs they download don't build
correctly on RH8. there were several such patches that RH8 quietly made for
their version of KDE and Qt (some of which were downright wrong and
boneheaded) and when asked why they did this, they said that they simply
hadn't given much thought and care to working with the community on this one.
i kid you not: this is what i was told directly by one of their top desktop
developers (who also happens to be a GNOME devel).
another example is how when you choose KDE as your desktop you don't actually
get the KDE applications: you still get non-KDE apps as defaults. now, i can
understand why they would choose Mozilla for the default web browser, or Open
Office as the default office suite. but Evolution as the default mail client
when you pick KDE as your desktop evnironment?! it would be like choosing to
install GNOME but getting KMail as your mail app. not only does it not give
the user what they asked for, but it has side effects like making KDE heavier
to run than GNOME on RH8 if you use the default apps.
another example is the KDE bluecurve style itself. because they developed this
completely outside the community, it shipped with TONS of bugs. bugs that the
KDE style developers spotted immediately and could've help fix in short order
(they're rather familiar with the style code, as you can imagine ;). instead
RH kept it to themselves and shipped KDE with a horridly broken,
crash-causing window decoration and widget style.
when i asked if RH would consider putting Bluecurve in KDE's kde-artwork CVS
module so that it can be developed as a first-tier part of KDE (which means
it would get proper Q&A and lots of very knowledgeable eyes on it) the answer
was a flat out "no". i didn't understand the reasoning behind this, so i
asked if they could explain this position for me. i was then told that they
felt it would be too difficult to work on it if it wasn't in their own CVS
server and that they couldn't if they wanted to because Bluecurve is
trademarked and thus can't be used by other companies.
the first excuse is bullshit, as many companies maintain code directly in
KDE's CVS. there is no difference whether your code is one CVS system or
another. especially not with a project as open and accomodating as the KDE
project. but open and accomodating are evidently not RH's preference for
development strategies when it comes to the desktop.
the second excuse is even more bullshit: bluecurve is released under the GPL.
i asked the FSF for clarification on the matter (trademarked names in GPL'd
software) and was told by one of their people who handles such inquiries that
Red Hat would not be able to enforce the trademark as releasing GPL'd code
with the name as part of it would almost assuredly be interpreted as an
implicit license for use by a US judge. of course, that's not what RH
employees are telling everyone. but why?
well, i believe that the third reason that i was given by the Red Hat
employees i was discussing this with is the real reason: Red Hat is
attempting to differentiate itself from other Linux distros by creating a
proprietary look and feel to their product. again, this revelation came
directly from their own decision makers. this isn't my interpretation of
events.
now, as far as i'm concerned, RH is free to do these things, just like any
other software company can do whatever they want as long as they follow the
law.
of course, i'm also free to avoid their products like the plague. i used to
recommend Red Hat but i no longer do.
what's very disconcerting is the apparent schizophrenia of RH's development
staff these days: their kernel and server hackers work closely with the
respective communities and are often important and vital members of those
communities. but their desktop side division pretty much exactly the opposite
with strong and openly expressed opinions that demonstrate this very
not-very-much-like-Free-Software attitude. this is resulting in them making
some seriously poor decisions.
sad, really.
- --
Aaron J. Seigo
GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler"
- Albert Einstein
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+MiQ/1rcusafx20MRAk5RAJ9BFOMhtE80U4AdFgCIdJCNT7DdwQCeOrJx
kC7tM8Aj//hj7tDvN5j+DkA=
=BBKO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
