GNOME Foundation To Focus On Fundraising After Years Running A Deficit

[Nth_man]

[...]
GPL = free
Proprietary = unfree
BSD/MIT/Apache = free but enables proprietary use

Yes, it enables proprietary use, and enables closed source projects to be able to use your code (and compete against your software) without giving back.

Yes, about the "BSD/MIT style licenses, those are truly free" arguments:

This is an old paradox of if there should be a freedom to limit freedom.

No.

[Panix]

Here are my key takeaways from 14 straight years of using KDE and derivatives:

1. KDE 4 was a mistake.
2. C++11 was the only redeeming quality to that idiotic mess because it slashed memory usage by 75%, but it happened far too late.
3. LXQt and Trinity are pretty good if you wanna run Gentoo, very solid package maintainership and very solid experience.
4. When a new major version of KDE comes out you can expect Gentoo to drag its feet for years. I didn't stop using LXQt specifically because it took more than a year for Gentoo to adopt KDE 5. After a year of checking the Gentoo wiki on how to install KDE 5, when it still insisted that it's called KFC 5, I just stopped bothering and moved on. Computers are ultimately for work, not for installing shiny bullshit.
5. KDE is good if you're using a binary distro. Every time I set up Fedora with KDE for someone they praise it for the solid and reliable experience.
6. LXQt has hardly changed visually in the 10 years I'm using it which is the best thing about it. No stupid UX air-headed trend-chasing hitler shit like in Gnome or Windows 8.
7. Reporting bugs to KDE and LXQt is a good experience.
8. Reporting Wayland bugs to KDE is something that will make people ignore your bug reports and if they manage to bother responding to you after weeks of awkward silence, they will try to deflect that they're not doing anything with Wayland, or that it's not Wayland's fault. This is weird and stupid. At least they're not doing the Wayland thrall bingo by starting to blurt "it's just a protocol" and total tourist bullshit "why do so many people hate wayland".

So....let me guess, you're not a KDE Fan? You prefer Gnome? It seems they both have their critics but I'm looking at the management of the Gnome team - and it is very distressing. I was just asking if the management of KDE is that bad. I suspect that both technically speaking - meaning - their devs and the actual behavior of the DEs both have their bugs and issues - I thought they might be about 'even' - so, if one has much worse management at the admin level, I'd pick the other one.

[skeevy420]

So....let me guess, you're not a KDE Fan? You prefer Gnome? It seems they both have their critics but I'm looking at the management of the Gnome team - and it is very distressing. I was just asking if the management of KDE is that bad. I suspect that both technically speaking - meaning - their devs and the actual behavior of the DEs both have their bugs and issues - I thought they might be about 'even' - so, if one has much worse management at the admin level, I'd pick the other one.

Anecdotally, I've always had pleasant experiences with KDE, AMD, and Mesa developers more than anyone else. GNOME and RHEL folks, not as much. Folks like bridgman, ngraham, and agd5f have been doing great things for their respective organizations in regards to positive community outreach and communications.

[rmoog]

So....let me guess, you're not a KDE Fan?

No. Lol

You prefer Gnome?

Lmao even

It seems they both have their critics but I'm looking at the management of the Gnome team - and it is very distressing. I was just asking if the management of KDE is that bad. I suspect that both technically speaking - meaning - their devs and the actual behavior of the DEs both have their bugs and issues - I thought they might be about 'even' - so, if one has much worse management at the admin level, I'd pick the other one.

I tried KDE 3 and it was great, but that was before I could afford to use Linux full-time. When I finally could, KDE 4 dropped and every distro just blindly adopted it against the wishes of KDE devs who tried to make it very obvious that it's not a finished product and everyone should just patiently wait. I really hated KDE 4 for being a Vista knockoff, so I used to use Gnome 2 - until every distro and their dead grandmother just blindly decided that scaring all the Windows refugees away with an iPad knockoff, because that's what Gnome 3 is, is the right thing to do. It seems that there's a reliable pattern of behavior here - distro maintainers do whatever they want with no responsibility, no accountability, no scrutiny, and without dogfooding the work they do - except in Gentoo from my years of experience with it. Sounds all too familiar with what's been happening at Microsoft since Windows 8. I am not a fan of what Gnome has become and I'm not getting hung up over the Gnome I used to love. I've moved on and I'm enjoying the outcome of sticking close to Qt and related DEs, even if they don't do everything exactly right. Please don't mistake me criticizing KDE or Qt for genuine hatred - if I really hated KDE and Qt, I'd just stay calm, stay quiet, and just let them further degenerate and destroy themselves.

I'd like to re-iterate those bulletpoints so that you don't mistake my character and experience for the opposite of what it is:
- KDE 4 was a dumpster fire compared to KDE 3
- Gnome 2 was a better alternative to KDE 4, but not KDE 3
- C++11 was a much needed upgrade in KDE 4 and Qt4 because the memory leaks were absolutely out of control, and it's really a true redeeming quality of what KDE took from us when dumping 3 and never returned when giving 4, but it came nearly at the end of KDE 4's lifetime which is a shame, it could've been more and better, I even ended up using KDE 4.10 for a while because it was better than never-ending DE-hopping to find the perfect replacement for Gnome 2, and unfortunately no, MATE needed more time, I did try it back then
- I have no idea why KDE decided "you know what screw this, we're not KDE, we're KF", because everyone just called it KDE and they seemed to have dropped this insistence sometime in 2018 if I remember correctly - strange decision, confusing, futile in the end
- KDE 5 is a solid experience for everyone I'm bringing over to Linux and they love it
- I'm just not on board with the idea of installing such a massive project from source since I use Gentoo, so I'm using LXQt, and have been for 10 years now
- LXQt is fantastic because it doesn't change its appearance in order to follow air-headed trends and bandwagons, it looks exactly like it did 10 years ago, it's an even more solid and stable experience and it's made entirely in Qt
- my interactions with KDE devs are overall very positive, except when I have a bone to pick with Wayland, I don't know what's their problem, is Wayland some kind of holy brahmin that can't do any wrong? Every time someone or something is above scrutiny it's a huge red flag for me and should be for everyone
- I have very little interactions with LXQt devs because there's that much less problems with LXQt than KDE, it seems they really know what they're doing

[rmoog]

Yes, it enables proprietary use, and enables closed source projects to be able to use your code (and compete against your software) without giving back.

Yes, about the "BSD/MIT style licenses, those are truly free" arguments:

This is an old paradox of if there should be a freedom to limit freedom.

No.

I have no problem with all code being free and especially under GPLv3. I've seen proprietary code during my work at a few companies significant to Linux and most of the time it's a hall of shame. Proprietary code isn't good because it's proprietary, and it's not proprietary because it's good.

[anda_skoa]

- I have no idea why KDE decided "you know what screw this, we're not KDE, we're KF"

KDE has and still is using that as their name.

KDE Frameworks (I assume this is what you meant) is just the name of the Qt libraries that KDE produces and which are often used by other Qt based projects.
LXQt being one of them.

[rmoog]

KDE has and still is using that as their name.

KDE Frameworks (I assume this is what you meant) is just the name of the Qt libraries that KDE produces and which are often used by other Qt based projects.
LXQt being one of them.

I may have remembered it incorrectly. I'm pretty sure that when people started asking for KDE 5, or asking how to install KDE 5, the KDE people asked to stop deadnaming their project because it's called KF 5.

[duby229]

Yes, it enables proprietary use, and enables closed source projects to be able to use your code (and compete against your software) without giving back.

Yes, about the "BSD/MIT style licenses, those are truly free" arguments:

This is an old paradox of if there should be a freedom to limit freedom.

No.

It's more like do you have the freedom to steal? The answer is obviously no. If your freedom is to do something horrible then it's not a freedom at all. If your freedom results in the taking away of my freedom then it isn't freedom. You have the freedom to smoke, but you do not have the freedom to smoke around me. You have the freedom to use free software, but you do not have the freedom to steal my free software. The GPL codifies that and makes it law.

[sophisticles]

a license like AGPLv3 would not be necessary if the copyright and patent law would not be broken by design.

just translate the AGPLv3 directly into law for all people in all cases and you will see the society prosper.

While I refuse to acknowledge this person directly, I do feel i need to address the main crux of the beliefs expressed.

Copyright, I will admit, needs adjustment. It was originally supposed to be for a limited amount of time so that the author could profit from his work but has since evolved to last 75 years past the original author's life, iirc.

Patent law is not broken, people are free to challenge patent applications and existing patents by petitioning the patent office and in fact there have been patent, and trademark, lawsuits that were dismissed as moot when the sued party successfully petitioned the relevant office to nullify the patent/trademark.

Without copyrights and patents, it would disincentivize people and companies from creating new things, no one would invest millions of dollars creating a new product or device if they couldn't patent it and anyone was free to use their work free of charge.

If copyrights didn't exist and anyone was free to steal other's original works, no one would invest millions to make a movie, no publisher would invest big money to publish a book and frankly few people would even write books.

Personal gain is the biggest motivator for most people, if you remove the ability of people to make money, we would end up back in the Dark Ages and for proof of this, look at the Great Depression, how society stagnated as people could not earn a living.

[rmoog]

All your quarrels with GPL and AGPL pale in comparison to the mighty SSPL