On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 7:30 PM, Timothy Pearson <kb9vqf(a)pearsoncomputing.net> wrote: Yes, now I understand why there will be no upgrade to 3.5.13. But it seems it's not a comfortable situation for TDE, it's a circle: without resource$ that leads to manpower, Trinity does progress very slow, BUT if it progresses slow, large corporations or else that can sponsor TDE development will run away. May I gave a suggestion? Why not make a release, 3.5.14, in early January, after the move to Git and the rename thing is completed?? Even if it cures only a small bunch of bugs, it will be good, in many respects. I don't know about others, but for myself, I can wait till January, but I will not wait for six months to have some needed polishing done, and will go away from TDE. What you think?

On 5 December 2011 10:22, Mag. Dr. Nikolaus Klepp <office(a)klepp.biz> wrote: +1 Sure there are bugs, mostly concerning specific apps. There is usually a gtk alternative for the apps awaiting bugfixes, without having to install gnome DE itself, or another workaround can be found. Comparing with the mainstream DE's out there, the overall functionality of TDE tips the balance in it's favour here. XFCE is about the only alternative unless you like glitz in your face and have the hardware to run it. And the "glitz" DE's have plenty of bugs too, look at the gnome3 fiasco. Who would replace TDE with that?

Le lundi 05 décembre 2011, Jorge Gonçalves a écrit : I am waiting too! I wish I could tinker with a few specific applications (kate, kmail), to see if I "am still capable" (-: the latest exerience make me seriously doubt) and because I have some wishes about them! I wait to be sure to be able to compile TDE on my current system without "breaking" anything and without the unexpected messages, the kind that I have placed on this list! Le lundi 05 décembre 2011, Mag. Dr. Nikolaus Klepp a écrit : I do not speak of going "elsewhere" and agree with David! For me, the options are: continue using what I use now (OSS 11.1 repeating "the repo is outdated"), and nothing else of non-functional. Good luck to everyone, Patrick

Doing a release properly requires a little over a month dedicated to release tasks such as beta testing, compiling packages on all distributions, compiling release notes, etc. Also, building binary packages is not cheap, in terms of both time (of our distribution maintainers) and money (to feed everyone's build computers with electricity). Releasing after the move to GIT would not cure a lot of the more stubborn bugs. Additionally, due to the renaming of *KDE* strings, the distribution maintainers have some work to do in order to update their packaging files. I don't want to place that kind of demand on our volunteer staff during the Christmas season, and then turn right around and demand the same thing a couple months later. Thoughts? Tim

That would be much more managable. As you said it won't work for this cycle, but it is a possibility for future releases. Tim

Hello! I've been off-line for a few days, but it seems no one commented more on this subject, and I even did not see any response to the post below. I really would like your opinions! :-) Thanks, Jorge ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: 2011/12/6 Subject: Re: [trinity-users] Upgrades to TDE 3.5.13 ... To: trinity-users(a)lists.pearsoncomputing.net On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Timothy Pearson <kb9vqf(a)pearsoncomputing.net> wrote: Hi! By "this cycle" you mean the current 3.5.13 or else? I really didn't understand why the Nikolaus suggestion could not be done, i.e., only release some bug fixing packages in January, after the move to GIt and the renaming is completed?? I think that after the patches there are waiting now are integrated into trunk, it will not take more than a few days to do some proper QA before releasing the packages. So, it will be a 3.5.14 release, yes, but in fact it will not be a full release, only with some updated packages. As I said before, I think this approach has a few great advantages: - testing building and releasing from Git as early as possible - testing the first steps towards serious QA testing and assurance - no need to do much about release notes, etc., because it will be a minor release - it will look like Trinity is a dynamic project - and, more important, _looking more dynamic_ means much more community involvement and voluntary help, in many ways (take my word, I know what I'm talking about) If none of the above arguments works, then there is this: - it cannot get bad or be worse !  ;-) Another thing:  " I don't want to place that kind of demand on our volunteer staff during the Christmas season " Ok, but maybe they will not be worried to do that extra effort?? So, yes it will mean some effort, but in the end, the outcome could only be good for the Trinity project. Or so I think. Jorge PS: Tim, one other suggestion: If you start talking that you can not do a release because  "is not cheap, in terms of  (...) money (to feed everyone's build computers with electricity)."  then you can be sure no one will ever take the Trinity project seriously and believe Trinity could grow up by itself !!

<snip> That is what I would like to see as well. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't the only one. ;-) Tim

On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 7:02 PM, Calvin Morrison &lt;mutantturkey(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: +1 This comment by Calvin is very relevant! And remember that, even if 3.5.13 is very stable and has no *serious* bug, for many people, small annoying little problems repeated over and over again tend to become a "greater" problem! And that could push users away from TDE...

On Tue, 6 Dec 2011 12:22:02 +0000 Lisi &lt;lisi.reisz(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: Hello Lisi, One word; Reputation. Certainly, but the "bad press" that's likely to be associated with the departure cannot do TDE any good. You can picture the scene, I'm sure:- "I used to use $projectname (it's not just TDE that's affected, obviously), but there were some really niggling bugs that the developers just didn't want to fix." Whether it's true that developers didn't want to fix them is irrelevant, the bad press will gain $projectname a reputation for being buggy and/or not listening to its users. Like Gnome. -- Regards _ / ) "The blindingly obvious is / _)rad never immediately apparent" Why do they try to hide our past pulling down houses and build car parks Bricks & Mortar - The Jam

This is correct. I have stated before that I agree in principle with SRUs, but that I personally don't have the time to generate them. If the distribution maintainers have the time and desire to generate distribution-specific SRUs based on patches on Bugzilla there is nothing standing in their way. Until we get a team dedicated to handling nothing but bug repair and patching/testing, I don't think official source SRUs are prudent. Instead, I'd like to suggest a list of suggested cherry-picked patches from the latest dvelopment HEAD. This could go on the Wiki and would allow the distribution maintainers to easily pull those patches they deem critical for their userbase out of the list of patches that we suggest. Tim

<snip> Basic economics. :-) Those products which appeal to the masses (usually the Lowest Common Denominator) will always receive more sales/support/attention than specialized products do. Tim

On Tue, 6 Dec 2011 18:38:52 +0000 Lisi &lt;lisi.reisz(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: Hello Lisi, Not necessarily. It could be mine that's the bizarre take. Although some of what I said in previous messages were not necessarily my take, just a "devils advocate" sort of thing. It's not just the users, but other members of the dev team that might have differing views as to what "the project" should be. That sort of thing happens quite often, otherwise Trinity wouldn't have forked from KDE (obviously). I don't disagree with that view. It's the bugs I was talking about initially, and users complaining about them. You're talking about the big picture or general overview of the project. Maybe I picked up the wrong end of the stick. As am I. I wouldn't even know where to start. I'm glad that people like writing software, all the way from little one-liner bash scripts right up to full blown DEs and beyond. That is another truism, of course. I quite like it, but it's not a "must have". I can easily see how others would get annoyed by it. Possibly even feel slightly ill viewing it. -- Regards _ / ) "The blindingly obvious is / _)rad never immediately apparent" People stare like they've seen a ghost Titanic (My Over) Reaction - 999

On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Mag. Dr. Nikolaus Klepp &lt;office(a)klepp.biz&gt; wrote: Hi Nikolaus! When I'm talking about "pushing users away", I'm not thinking about us, the people that already use Trinity for some time, because for us we already know what we want, and what is better for each one case. I'm thinking about the many people that had see the 3.5.13 announcement and had the curiosity to install and try the new Trinity version. The question here is: - how many of them had stayed in Trinity, and not reverted back to their usual desktop?? And, other questions, that in fact are the motivation for this thread, is: - what is Trinity doing to expand is user base?? - is Trinity doing the right steps towards that goal? - or, having more people using Trinity really isn't important and does not matter to the TDE developers?? And, responding to Nikolaus, yes, there are other good desktop alternatives, but of course it depends of your use cases. Personally, besides the "old" KDE 3.5.10, that still works well for me, for work I like very much the KNOPPIX 6.7 desktop (CD version), simple but effective, and for leisure (or light work) Windows 7 is perfect. Jorge.