3 Mar
2011
3 Mar
'11
5:52 p.m.
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 12:34 PM, David C. Rankin
<drankinatty(a)suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
A discussion started on another thread on whether to keep the name
Trinity Desktop Environment or to rename to KDE Classic. I thought I'd
make this discussion a bit more obvious to those who may want to
provide input.
--
Kris
"Piki"
Ark Linux Webmaster
Trinity Desktop Environment Packager
On 03/03/2011 07:28 AM, Ilya Chernykh wrote:
<snip>
Recently I saw
in the KDE forum that somebody suggested that Trinity could be
named "KDE Classic" to empathize the connection with all the KDE heritage and
history and also underline that it is the true KDE.
I think I should agree that this is reasonable idea.
- It would spare you from re-branding and re-drawing the artwork.
- KDE is well known desktop and brand.
- Many KDE3 apps claim they are written for KDE. This may create confusion
with some users if they use Trinity.
- Continuous version system (KDE Classic 4 etc vs. Trinity 4).
- You empathize that KDE3 did not dead, and KDE Classic is the true KDE rather
than KDE SC 4.
- Parallels with Mac OS Classic, Windows Classic (a Windows appearance theme)
terms.
- You can keep the both names: "KDE Classic by Trinity project" etc.
I thought many times what would happen if the creators of KDE4 named their
desktop "Plasma" or something and left the brand of KDE to KDE3. I think in
that case KDE4 would not be so popular because the users would not associate
it with KDE and perceived only KDE3 as the last true KDE. Indeed the name
means very much.
If you look at the openSuSE and kde lists as early as 2008, I thought "KDE
Classic" made sense for kde.org for 4 reasons:
(1) there was no rational reason for 'abandoning' the kde3 code - it was a
fantastic desktop;
(2) kde3 and kde4 are not mutually exclusive, they can both exist side-by-side,
(3) continuing to offer kde3 provided users a 'choice' of kde desktops (which
is what open-source is supposed to be all about), and
(4) the manpower provided by kde.org required to maintain kde3 was minimal
compared to the requirements of developing the new kde4.
Basically, it was a "why throw the baby out with the bath water?" issue.
I think kde.org may be more receptive to this idea now than they were 2 years
ago and this project has proven the kde3 can be maintained and moved into the
future with virtually no resources from kde.org, ...and... to be fair I should
also add a 5th reason it makes sense for kde.org to continue KDE Classic. It
provides them with a fallback:
(5) "what do we do when kde4 blows up in our face?"