Qt5 -> KDE5?

Ozan Çağlayan ozan at pardus.org.tr
Mon May 9 20:44:03 BST 2011

On 09.05.2011 21:17, Alberto Mattea wrote:

> 2) Binary compatibility. It has taken four years to port most KDE3 apps to the 
> new infrastructure, and some (like Kooka) never did it. Many projects just 
> ended the transition from KDE3. Experience shows that even a well alive 
> project may not have the necessary manpower to do a drastic rewrite of the 
> code. So I would take Qt5 as an opportunity to fix legacy interfaces without 
> caring about binary compatibility, but (following Qt direction) the effort to 
> port existing code should be nowhere near the one needed from KDE3 to KDE4. 
> This would allow to maintain the good condition "there is a KDE app for 
> everything", which has been just recently achieved again. So, from a technical 
> point of view, don't rush to drop QWidget and switch to QML; let them live 
> together for all the necessary time, and ensure a smooth step-by-step 
> migration is possible.
> 3) Core apps, or "shall we change again everything?". It took at least 3 minor 
> releases (or 2 years since KDE 4.0) to have a fully crash-free experience with 
> the plasma shell. Now it looks fantastic, it is modular (desktop, netbook, 
> media centre) and light (it is usable on an 800 Mhz pentium III). I would hope 
> for a stable 5.0 release, also in connection with point 1). So I'd say don't 
> start again from scratch: the current base is solid, extendable, users 
> recognize it. Changement is not necessarily for good.

Absolutely. A lot of projects died during KDE3 -> KDE4. A few of them
decided to continue *only* for KDE3 without supporting KDE4 at all.

That was reasonable to completely break the compatibility with KDE3 as
it was too old but KDE4 is still young and even pre-mature in some
fields compared to KDE3.

Let's please not break all the KDE4 applications around once again.


Ozan Caglayan

Pardus Linux

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list