kde 3.1 -- make Keramik default?

[David Leimbach]

> > b) Is current style more usable than Keramik? How? Why?
>
> The default is a known good quantity.  If the default were no good, then
> sometime between 2.0 and 3.0.1 there would have been criticisms made.
> This is hard, observable evidence.  Only now is the default being
> criticized for being out of fashion, stodgy, non-modern, or just plain
> old.
>
> Keramik and Crystal, on the other hand, is new.  A new icon style, a new
> widget pixmap engine, a new way for buttons and other widgets to look and
> act.  We have no evidence that it's any good at all.
>
The same can be said for any new "feature" of KDE.  KDE appears to be an 
exercise of the "Bazaar" development style ESR talks about.  If this is true 
than nothing is truly "tested" before its released.  I am not saying you are 
incorrect Neil;  just that everything in KDE seems to work this way.

Hell, look at Linux... anyone remember the nightmare that was 2.4.15?  2.4.16 
came out 24 hours later.  No testing.... just a release.  These are the 
prices you seem to pay when doing bazaar style development.  Managing  such a 
project seems to turn into directed chaos.  

I am admittedly a newbie at the bazaar stuff but I suppose it can have value 
in that supposedly more eyes will view the code and get the bugs out faster.  
It just seems that the same argument introduces new bugs equally as fast...  
Self defeating if you ask me [but you didn't so I will shut up 8-)]

Dave