Slashdot Mirror


Kdenlive Developer Jean-Baptiste Mardelle Has Been Found

jones_supa writes "A month ago there was worry about Kdenlive main developer being missing. Good news guys, Jean-Baptiste Mardelle has been finally reached and is doing fine. In a new mailing list post by Vincent Pinon, he says he managed to find Mardelle's phone number and contacted the longtime KDE developer. It was found out that Mardelle took a break over the summer but then lost motivation in Kdenlive under the burden of the ongoing refactoring of the code. Pinon agreed that there are 'so many things to redo almost from scratch just to get the 'old' functionalities'. The full story can be read from the kdenlive-devel mailing list. After talking with Jean-Baptiste, Vincent has called upon individual developers interested in Kdenlive to come forward. Among the actions called for is putting the Git master code-base back in order, ensuring the code is in good quality, provide new communication about the project, integrate new features like GPU-powered effects and a Qt5 port, and progressively integrate the new Kdenlive design."

45 of 85 comments (clear)

  1. Classic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    An open source project stuck in "refactoring hell". Seems to have happened to Inkscape too. Such a waste.

    Heavily refactoring projects of this size rarely brings any benefit for the users, it's just technical masturbation. If you're lucky, you will after a few years end up with a project that does the same things as before, most likely it will have acquired some bugs as icing on the cake.

    Taking a few years to refactor your project might sound like a good idea at first, but chances are, you won't even be relevant anymore by the time you're done.

    Some open source projects would benefit from proper managers who can stop them from shooting themselves in the foot.

    1. Re:Classic... by d33tah · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You forgot that refactoring might decrease the maintenance costs. It's possible that the developer just found it too hard to add any new functionality to the existing codebase and figured that refactoring is the only way to go. Seriously, it's not always enough for a project to work. Actually, it usually isn't.

    2. Re:Classic... by dmbasso · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I just want to point out one counterexample: Blender. The work done in the 2.5 version was huge, but it allowed lots of improvements later. Totally worth it.

      --
      `echo $[0x853204FA81]|tr 0-9 ionbsdeaml`@gmail.com
    3. Re:Classic... by d33tah · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There's no such thing as proper architecture at the first try. By programming, you explore the problems you have to face. In "The Mythical Man-Month", Fred Brooks says that it's not first or second system that is correctly design, but usually the third. Rewriting is a part of a process.

    4. Re:Classic... by squiggleslash · · Score: 2

      It sounds to me as if you're confusing refactoring, where existing, good, well tested, code is kept, and reorganized so that it's more maintainable, extendible, and better suited to current needs, with rewriting, where good code is thrown out and new code is written introducing new bugs.

      Refactoring does not take "years". Ever.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    5. Re:Classic... by hey! · · Score: 1

      I don't think it's so simple as "refactoring is bad". I think i'ts more that 'stopping the delivery of new value to users is bad". Cleaning up as you go along is not only a healthy practice, actually accomplishing something new is healthy for refactoring. It keeps you focused on achieving flexibility that is actually needed as opposed to that which might be useful.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    6. Re:Classic... by thisisauniqueid · · Score: 1

      An open source project stuck in "refactoring hell". Seems to have happened to Inkscape too. Such a waste.

      Heavily refactoring projects of this size rarely brings any benefit for the users, it's just technical masturbation. If you're lucky, you will after a few years end up with a project that does the same things as before, most likely it will have acquired some bugs as icing on the cake.

      That's why when we don't like code, we should start reimplementing it from scratch immediately.

    7. Re:Classic... by rasmusbr · · Score: 1

      Some open source projects would benefit from proper managers who can stop them from shooting themselves in the foot.

      Or a bigger revenue stream that can help them stay motivated to burn hours on boring tasks. Of course it's going to take years if they average a tiny number of hours per month because the developer(s) are bored with it.

    8. Re:Classic... by icebike · · Score: 1

      Refactoring should be done on a "need to basis". Need to implement a specific feature, but it's not possible within the programs architecture? Make the required changes and get on with life.

      But starting a "Let's refactor just because" is a folly.

      Its hard to know what forced this refactoring. Was it forced upon him by the totally mishandled move from KDE3 to KDE4, or was it something internal that he did, without realizing the amount of work involved?

      Is he better off sitting back for a while while KDE again refactors its framework for KDE 5? Is that going to be yet another huge debacle, setting KDE back 4 years like the last re-factor?

      At this point in time, KDE 4.12.0 is probably the best KDE in a long time. But 4.12 is probably the last bug-fix that the 4 branch will get, as all the developers have move on to 5.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    9. Re:Classic... by Lendrick · · Score: 1

      Heavily refactoring projects of this size rarely brings any benefit for the users, it's just technical masturbation. If you're lucky, you will after a few years end up with a project that does the same things as before, most likely it will have acquired some bugs as icing on the cake.

      This was wrong when people said it about Netscape. It's still wrong now. It's just that the payoff is unfortunately in years and not months.

    10. Re:Classic... by Daniel+Hoffmann · · Score: 1

      Refactoring is necessary when building up on top of the existing code stops being fun. Fun motivates programmers which in turn increase productivity and quality and specially in open source projects that are not backed by some company keeps the development going.

      You might think this is all just mental masturbation but big-scale refactoring usually only starts when there is something really wrong. The main problem is that many devs when refactoring avoid the traps they triggered before but end up falling for other traps. Being a great dev is not so much about being able to code in a frenzy (like oh so many movies show), but to actually be able to maintain a big project going.

    11. Re:Classic... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Is he better off sitting back for a while while KDE again refactors its framework for KDE 5?

      According to what the KDE team has said, they're not refactoring anything for KDE5. It's only going to be a simple port from Qt4 to Qt5. Qt5 isn't much different from Qt4 anyway, so it's probably not going to amount to much change.

    12. Re:Classic... by suy · · Score: 1

      Heavily refactoring projects of this size rarely brings any benefit for the users, it's just technical masturbation. (...)

      Some open source projects would benefit from proper managers who can stop them from shooting themselves in the foot.

      You are missing an important point: many people that work on a software project in their spare time do it to have fun. I work as a programmer for a living, and at work I do what my employer wants me to do. I might not like the way I have to do things at work, but I do as my manager says.

      If I work on a hobby project to have fun, I want to do things the way that make me happy. It might be the case that you are happy making a killer product that has tons of users, even if the internals are crap. Or it might be the case that you are only happy with something that has a nice architecture and uses bleeding edge technologies, even if that makes the product unstable an unpopular.

      I don't know what is the state of Kdenlive and the opinion of Jean-Baptiste Mardelle, but I hope you know better if you make such assumptions about other's projects.

    13. Re:Classic... by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      ...which could have been avoided in the first place, but if it had been Linux would have been an over engineered cluster fsck.

      I'm a firm believer in correct first, clever later.

    14. Re:Classic... by murdocj · · Score: 1

      Definitely. Just reading the mailing list entry makes this clear. It sounds like the developer was looking at doing virtually a complete rewrite in one shot, and found himself overwhelmed at that prospect. The mailing list entry just tries to break it down into some smaller projects and farm them out. Management is exactly what was needed.

    15. Re:Classic... by the_other_chewey · · Score: 1

      ...Linux would have been an over engineered cluster fsck.

      Then let's be grateful Linux is a full OS kernel and not just its storage subsystem.

    16. Re:Classic... by ghjm · · Score: 1

      The word "refactor" has been insanely successful in getting managers to approve rewrites. Before the Agile Manifesto, when programmers wanted to take a completed function and write it again, they would ask to "rewrite" it. The manager would ask what's wrong with it, the programmers would say, "nothing, really" and the manager would decline the request. Now, the programmers ask to "refactor" the function, the manager asks what that means, and the programmers give a confused answer whose only consistent message is that whatever-it-is is urgently needed. So the manager says, "okay, I guess."

      The first case leads to crufty codebases that are hard to add new functions to. The second case leads to writing the same functions over and over and getting nowhere. It's not clear to me which is better, but it is clear to me that substituting the word "refactor" for "rewrite" has changed the world.

    17. Re:Classic... by buchner.johannes · · Score: 1

      I just want to point out one counterexample: Blender. The work done in the 2.5 version was huge, but it allowed lots of improvements later. Totally worth it.

      Mozillas refactoring of Netscape enabled Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox 1.0. If you have dedicated developers, a refactoring will also make them understand the codebase fully, making it easier for them to change larger parts such as design aspects.

      Xorg is trying to do the same thing with the X11 codebase. The first step was modularizing. That's a project you can get into if you are looking for something difficult but worthwhile.

      --
      NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
  2. Kickstarter? by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    it's a mature enough product that a kickstarter could probably raise the funding needed to get the work done :).

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  3. girlfriend stops speaking to you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    ...you assume something horrible has happened to girlfriend.

    People like to be left alone a lot more than controlling types hope, and assume their silence must mean the worst.

    1. Re:girlfriend stops speaking to you... by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When this was last a Slashdot "story" somebody said, "he's probably busy - here's his phone #, why doesn't somebody give him a call?" So, somebody did that and we get another "story".

      The real "story" here is that a lead developer gave up on a project and left without communicating. Perhaps there's a good lesson here about Open Source project governance that.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    2. Re:girlfriend stops speaking to you... by chromas · · Score: 1

      Nah, he just took a break but then lost motivation in his sentence under the burden of the ongoing refactoring of the code.

    3. Re:girlfriend stops speaking to you... by murdocj · · Score: 1

      Well, it's a question of which is the bigger risk: a proprietary product is abandoned because the company doesn't have the revenue stream to support it, or an open source project dies because no one wants to pick it up. Yes, there's the "possibility" that someone else will pick up an open source project, but that's just a possibility. There's also the possibility that someone will like a proprietary product enough to pay to keep it going. It's not like Open Source is a guaranteed win.

  4. I dunno... by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Funny

    Sometimes when a girlfriend or wife stops speaking to you, you count your blessings and leave well enough alone.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:I dunno... by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      Let sleeping dogs lie...

      ...lying bitch.

  5. I just wonder... by jones_supa · · Score: 1

    Would things have been better if the project was financially sponsored better? Mardelle might have been much more motivated to continue the work on the refactoring and, he might not have just disappeared because of "what's there for me in it".

  6. Re:so a guy works for free and quits and people fr by jones_supa · · Score: 1

    It's still a bit worrying how things are arranged in open source if the lead developer of a major KDE video editing suite can just disappear on a whim and later just say "nah, I didn't feel it anymore". He didn't even write a "guys, I'm feeling a bit overwhelmed" message but made people worry if something bad had happened to him.

    What would happen if the lead developer of Apple's iMovie just didn't appear at workplace after his summer break?

  7. Re:so a guy works for free and quits and people fr by folderol · · Score: 1

    Anyone with a little empathy.

  8. Re:so a guy works for free and quits and people fr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    7+ billion people found to not contributing as Kdenlive main developers have continued to not respond regarding their total absence from the project.

    Why is everyone worried about the guy who gave the most already leaving? There are literally billions of people who gave nothing, and they haven't justified their continuing to do so. If you don't want to work on any particular project donating your time to the world, that is not a problem, its simply a lack of giving an undeserved gift to the rest of us.

    I suspect this guy was driven from the project that he loved by the burden of it. That hurts him far more than it hurts us, so yes, we should have empathy to him: he gave is great gifts, and now suffers for it. Thank you Jean-Baptiste Mardelle: I don't know what the hell Kdenlive is, but it looks opensource, and a lot of work, so I'm glad to have more code out there for people to use.

  9. Software Developer Feared To Be Dead by Ukab+the+Great · · Score: 4, Funny

    Found alive having a life. More news at a 11.

  10. Major difference by MrEricSir · · Score: 3, Informative

    Kdenlive is essentially one guy's hobby project. Blender has a number of professional developers working on it full time. Both are open source, but it's really an apples-to-oranges comparison.

    --
    There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
  11. Re:so a guy works for free and quits and people fr by jones_supa · · Score: 1

    Well, technically not. I mean that it would have been ethically fair to let others know.

  12. Re:so a guy works for free and quits and people fr by Desler · · Score: 1

    It will disappear? How so? Is Microsoft going to force people to uninstall it?

  13. Re:so a guy works for free and quits and people fr by epyT-R · · Score: 1, Informative

    I don't agree. Someone can up and leave a personal project any time they choose. They should not be obligated to prop up anyone's feelings.

  14. Re:so a guy works for free and quits and people fr by Desler · · Score: 1

    Nice try at goalpost shifting. So now do you care to show how it will "disappear"?

  15. Re:so a guy works for free and quits and people fr by jones_supa · · Score: 2

    It makes it different because there was other people involved and Kdenlive has a status of being an important software.

  16. Way To Embarrass Him by enter+to+exit · · Score: 1

    I'm sure he still maintains some interest in KDE and reads the tech news..chances are he saw the initial brouhaha regarding his absence and ignored it.

    Way to embarrass him...this whole adventure, from beginning to end, reeks of a serious lack of basic communication and social skills.

  17. Re:OOP To The Rescue! by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

    They were clearly doing it wrong or something.

  18. Re:OOP To The Rescue! by dcollins117 · · Score: 1

    Code reuse? Readability? Maintainability? Wasn't OOP suppose to solve that?

    It was supposed to help. It turns out writing reusable software is very hard to do. Though OOP is only one technology that has promised more than it can deliver.

    I remember when I first learned about COM in the mid 80's, and how revolutionary it would be. You just plug software components together like breadboarding a hardware circuit. I thought to myself "Great! I can just unplug the editor in my IDE, plug in a Emacs component and I'll be good to go."

    Seems like we should be able to do that, doesn't it? Needless to say, it's near the end of 2013 and we are nowhere close to having that functionality for either the developer or user. Ah, well.

  19. Motivation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If somebody pays me for three months to re-invent the wheel then I can cope with that. OTOH 'why' volunteer when so few join in and make it a party of like-minds in an orgy of better engineering?

    For me a lot of programming is like playing with a model railway. It's an intellectual and artistic diversion where detail matters... ...Which is why I can't understand the 'open for gacking' methods of Git/Guthub. I want newbies to be mentored then directed then become part of a team that knows how to jointly own an objective and share the methods.

         

  20. There's a word for that type of thing. by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

    There's a word that describes what happened exactly: Gafiate. Gafiating is sort of like taking a vacation, but it's a vacation from your hobby or other spare-time activity, such as working on OSS projects. Sometimes, you just have to walk away for a while until the interest comes back. If nothing else, it's good to know that there's nothing seriously wrong.

    --
    Good, inexpensive web hosting
    1. Re:There's a word for that type of thing. by ShoulderOfOrion · · Score: 2

      Actually, I think more OSS project developers should do something like this. This is what I do all the time on my projects. If the software is working but 1) you're getting burned out, 2) you want to re-write it from scratch, 3) you're wandering off on some tangent, 4) real life happens, well, STOP.

      The code works. Leave it alone. Don't break it. Don't touch it. Take a breather. Meditate about something else. Read a good book. Don't start typing in more code until you're relaxed and refreshed and eager. If you're still excited about the code you've probably already been thinking about it and have changed the architecture in your mind half a dozen times, and have already iterated on a much better solution than the abomination you would have hacked up in a hurry earlier. Good. If you'd rather move on that's fine too, just announce it's over and let someone else pick it up if they're interested.

      Way too many developers are like manic bridge builders--they build a perfectly fine and functional wooden bridge across a river, but then decide they should have built it in concrete with twice as many lanes. They destroy the old functional bridge by driving concrete pilings through it and get the new bridge built halfway across the river before running out of drive, materials, or both. The end result is yet another project plunging into obscurity. Don't do that.

  21. Re:so a guy works for free and quits and people fr by murdocj · · Score: 1

    Exactly. Both are unmaintained. In other words, there's no advantage to the open source project over the proprietary one if neither is maintained.

  22. Re:so a guy works for free and quits and people fr by murdocj · · Score: 1

    Ah yes, thus reinforcing the stereotype of programmers as have zero empathy for others.

  23. Re:so a guy works for free and quits and people fr by jones_supa · · Score: 2

    It still makes no difference because he still do not owe anything to people who have decided they find his work important.

    I certainly think he owes. Not juridically but as part of having good manners.