KDE 2.2 Released

Well, we had covered it being tagged last week, and now, after a hardware problem with one of the main download servers, KDE is ready for download. Except that you'll probably want to go to the mirrors to actually get it. You can get more about it about it from Dre's dot.kde post, or you can read the KDE announcement - and have a good time!

Comments

Mirrrors list (someone had to do it, right?)

[pdiaz]

Europe:
ftp://gd.tuwien.ac.at/hci/kde
ftp://sunsite.cnlab-switch.ch/mirror/kde
ftp://sunsite.mff.cuni.cz/MIRRORS/ftp.kde.org/pu b/ kde/
ftp://ftp.rz.uni-wuerzburg.de/pub/unix/kde
ftp://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/pub/Linu x/ kde
ftp://sunsite.auc.dk/pub/X/kde
ftp://ftp.dataplus.se/pub/linux/kde
ftp://ftp.dit.upm.es/linux/mirrors/ftp.kde.org/p ub /kde

Asia:
ftp://ftp.au.kde.org/pub/kde
ftp://casper.yz.yamagata-u.ac.jp/mirror/kde
ftp://linux.sarang.net/mirror/desktop/kde

Africa:
ftp://ftp.sun.ac.za/sites/ftp.kde.org/pub/kde
ftp://ftp.na.kde.org/pub/kde

America:
ftp://ftp.matrix.com.br/pub/kde
ftp://mirror.chpc.utah.edu/pub/kde
ftp://ftp.rutgers.edu/pub/kde

Now, could anybody tell me when the debian (potato) packages of the 2.2. will be available?

KDE and Ximian Gnome Can't Get Along?

[idonotexist]

Apt-getting kde, noticed kde removes gdm. I thought --- well, I'll install kde 2.2 and then reinstall gdm. After installing kde, apparently an install of gdm is not possible without removing kdm and kde.

While I enjoy using gnome more than kde, I like to occassionally use kde by selecting kde in gdm. However, with kde 2.2, this no longer seems possible. Does someone have any suggestions to allow gdm with kde 2.2?

Re:Site-specific popup policy

[Drone-X]

but what I'd really like to see is the ability to disable window.open on a site-specific basis as well.

Or even better, ignore window.open being used when loading or unloading a page but allow it when I click a link. Now that would effectively stop banners without having to keep going to the configuration dialog.

some notes

[HeUnique]

Hi people,

Just few words about this release (and future road-map)..

This is the final major version of KDE 2.2 - expect KDE 2.2.1 next month with all the last-minute bug fixes (without any new features), and translations update..

The next major version is going to be KDE 3.0 that will be out at around January 2002 featuring QT 3.0.x (with all the QT 3 features), and some changes in the backend, among other things. Most of KDE will be ported from 2.2 to 3.0. SO people who want to either developer QT or KDE applications might want to download QT 3 snapshot and play with it. It's got some bugs - but it's pretty stable.

People who would like to contribute to the KDE development are most welcome to join - you don't have to be a C++ programmer in order to contribute - Graphics artists, GUI guru's, HTML experts and others are more then welcome to join the big KDE famility of developers..

I thin it's also a good time for you - the reader/user to post what do you want to be changed in KDE? what do u hate about KDE? what do you like? What do you think should be improved? What do you think should be removed? most of the KDE developers read slashdot - so maybe your request will be fullfilled - you never know...

As for other platforms - expect KDE 2.2 to be available within days for Solaris (X86 & Sparc), HP/UX, SGI's Irix, IBM AIX, and others..

Enjoy the release people - lots of work has been done on this one - and you get as a bonus %30-%50 speed increase..

Re:some notes

[ozbird]

I thin it's also a good time for you - the reader/user to post what do you want to be changed in KDE? what do u hate about KDE? what do you like? What do you think should be improved? What do you think should be removed? most of the KDE developers read slashdot - so maybe your request will be fullfilled - you never know...

I would dearly love to roll out KDE as the Unix desktop at work - works great on Intel platforms (with > 64MB RAM to avoid "excessive" swapping to disk) but ran into some problems when trying to get it working under Solaris. I haven't tried 2.2 yet - hopefully this fixes some of these issues.

What I would like to see changed are its resource requirements. Slim it down! We're considering replacing our current X-terminals (some old Labtams, Tektronix and NCD boxes) with diskless PCs running Linux - disks are not an option. If KDE can run on a diskless machine with 128MB RAM (with an NFS-mounted /home directory) - this would be a real winner.

Increase scalability. Apart from RAM, KDE spawns a bunch of processes. On a workstation this isn't a problem, but scale it up to a several hundred users on a large box and things can get a bit ugly. (Haven't pushed it this far - extrapolating for a handful of trial users.) Do you really need so many kdeinit jobs?

I love KDE; my boss likes it. Now if I could just get it to work as well as the users expect things to work...

Work with the GNOME people (and vice versa)

[Nailer]

My suggestion: work closer with GNOME (and vice versa. Its entirely possib;le to have 2 seperate projects without the current incompatibility and lack of standards between the two.

Users don't pick their apps based on toolkit. They pick them based on quality. For almost all users, that's going to be a mix of KDE and GNOME apps.

Create a standard for:

* Component models. Really. We know its hard to agree on, but it must be done.

* File types - > application mapping database (some people call these MIME types).

* Launcher menus. Application developers and end users are tired of having to add new apps Mozilla to two different sets of menus. Nobody says `I want a QT app...oh, and by the way, can it be a web browser'?. They say `I want a web browser'. They don't care about toolkits and neither should the desktop menus.

* Panel applets.

* Icons. GNOME uses 48 x 48. KDE uses various sizes (which is probably a better way to do it - 48 x 28 icons do notRe:some notes not look pretty). Have a kind word to the GNOME folk and suggest they use the same approach as KDE.

* Package deployment. I'd love to download KDE via Ximian's Red Carpet, or a KDE interface for the same.

Re:KHTML & IE compatibility. Bah!

[A coward on a mouse]

You're absolutely right. And if, by adhering to a standard not adhered to by the browser used by the rest of the world, 90% of pages look like shit in Linux, well, fsck 'em, we didn't want to look at those pages. And if nobody uses Linux because 90% of all web pages look like sh*t, well, fsck them too, we don't want those kind of people using Linux. I'm sure that everyone will feel so bad that the colicky Linux users aren't participating that the world will change.

Seriously though, your hardline standards-compliance stance is an idea whose time has either passed or whose time is not yet come. Some facts:

1. The defacto standard *is* IE. If you don't believe this, you are in denial.
2. The vast majority of web authors are not interested in finding a "long term solution". Not only is finding long term solutions difficult, but doing so harms the web author's job security and besides, most clients expect a complete re-work of their site every once in a while, to keep it fresh.
3. As a result of the above, most of the web is optimized for IE.
4. Approximately 0% of average users give a good goddamn whether the web page they are viewing is standards compliant.
5. Approximately 100% of average users don't care if the browser uses black magic to render the pages as long as the pages be readable.

If Linux wants to attract users, Linux will need a browser that can render the millions of pages already written for IE somewhere near as well as IE can render them. On the other hand, if Linux is hoping to go down in history as a highly standards-compliant system that was too good for this world, then your way is the right choice.

Re:Been running it for a week now, great release.

[10Ghz]

i just hope they learn to quit breaking binary compatibility with each major release :)

Doesn't GCC 3 break binary compatibility regardless? KDE decided to move to QT3 when they did so end-users would have easier time. If they did it otherwise, users would lose binary compatibility when changing to GCC 3, and then again when moving to KDE/QT 3. This way they can move to GCC/KDE/QT 3 in the same time, breaking binary compatibility only once (instead of twice)

There was a long discussion about this among KDE-developers