interesting comment from a poster on phoronix

ianseeks ianseeks at
Thu Aug 20 16:29:27 BST 2015

On Thursday 20 Aug 2015 16:29:07 Kevin Krammer wrote:
> On Thursday, 2015-08-20, 14:47:30, ianseeks wrote:
> > On Thursday 20 Aug 2015 14:06:34 Kevin Krammer wrote:
> > > On Thursday, 2015-08-20, 10:37:59, ianseeks wrote:
> > > >
> > > > .0
> > > > 8
> > > > 
> > > > >> "Ahead of the Plasma 5.4 release later this month and after last
> > > > >> week's
> > > > >> KDE
> > > > >> Frameworks 5.13 release is KDE Applications 15.08."
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> How am I supposed to keep track of these things?!
> > > > 
> > > > Thats a lot of numbers to keep your eye on when reading about KDE
> > > 
> > > From my point of view these kind of comments are very close to troll
> > > territory.
> > 
> > I don't see it as that. I just thought it was an interesting take on what
> > someone was reading and how they saw it.
> I can understand that there is a certain mental step involved in realizing
> that a vendor can in fact have more than one product.
> What I do not understand is why other vendors would be allowed to have
> multiple products but KDE would not.
> Why KDE should cease to develop applications and soley work on a desktop
> shell.
> Why Qt application developers should not benefit from third party Qt
> libraries and restrict themselves to those provided by the Qt project.

i don't think thats being suggested or meant. I'm seeing this from a users 
point of view, not a developer. Simplicity is best from the users perspective.  
Maybe its the way the headline in the article was put together implying that 
that they all depended on each other but there seemed to be no common link.  
> The different version numbers are a constant reminder to those who would
> rather see application development to be stoppped and libraries to be kept
> internal that their wished are just not the reality.
> IMHO this allegeded "difficulty" is just an attempt to gather support for
> their goal of having KDE deliver a desktop and nothing else.

I don't see that intention or conclusion at all. I was just asking if a 
project is dependent on a fundamental part of the plumbing, should the version 
number reflect it? 

> > Its just the version numbering has a chance of getting out of hand and not
> > being linked to each other.  E.g. does the "5" in plasma 5.4 relate to the
> > "5" in Frameworks 5.13?  If so, what does the KDE-Applications-15.08
> > relate
> > to regarding Frameworks etc.
> One of the initial proposals for the next Plasma version was Plasma 2, as
> this is what it would have been.
> There was concern that would cause confusion since many people equate the
> desktop with KDE itself, so that would have been KDE 2, which was already
> taken.
> So to allow people who only use KDE's desktop product to refer to it as KDE
> or Plasma with the same version number, 5 was chosen as the base version
> for what is actually Plasma 2.
> Similar reason for the Framework version, to avoid them being called "KDE
> Libs 1". Seems this alternative naming wasn't used at all, so yes, it could
> have been KDE Frameworks 1.
> As for KDE Applications, being a bundle, similar to a Linux distribution
> being a collection of individual software items, the version chosen
> reflects the point in time of the release.
> Its version does not relate to any of the libraries being used by the
> applications it contains, it would be impossible to do that given the number
> of libraries involved.
> > Would it be an idea to prefix all sub projects of KDE with a unified
> > number
> > relating to the framework it depends on so as an example, KDE 5 is made up
> > of Plasma 5.5.4., Frameworks 5.13, KDE Applications 5.15.08.  This will
> > make it easier for us outside the development world to see a link between
> > the sub projects.
> What would be the benefit of that. This would only artifically suggest
> relation where there is none.
> Microsoft Office 2015 is not called Microsoft Office 10.2015 just because it
> happens to be released at the time when Windows 10 is the vendor's current
> "desktop" product.
> Users could be confused, guess a relation and assume Office 2015 can only be
> used on Windows 10.
> While Microsoft would gladly have as many Windows users as possible to
> upgrade to Windows 10, they have abstained from creating this mental
> bridge. Most likely because they rather have people get Office 2015 even if
> they are "just" on Windows 7 or 8.

I'm not sure if this MS Office is a good example because its a set of programs 
that are related to a function whereas KDE Applications are a collection of 
mostly unrelated programs.  

Will KDEPIM become KDEPIM5 once its all ported to KF5?
> Exactly why KDE Applications has a very different version scheme, to avoid
> people mistakingly assume a connection between the applications and Plasma
> desktop when there is none as far as using the applications is concerned.
> Cheers,
> Kevin

Have i opened an old wound here with this question?  Apologies if i have.


This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:
More info:

More information about the kde mailing list