New info about Blue Systems

[SteveRiley]

Martin Gräßlin, KWin developer, is joining Blue Systems full time. It's always pleasing to see additional resources added to the development of our favorite distro.

Judging from the comments in the article, a number of folks are seeking to find out more about Blue Systems. Eventually, a page appeared in the English version of Wikipedia.

[capt-zero]

Thanks for the post Steve, I'm glad to see the KDE side of Kubuntu developement is being covered.

[MoonRise]

Agree about resources to a great project. Glad to see.

[manuel]

Thanks Martin for supporting Kubuntu. After Gnome3 disaster I was one step to move back to Windows. Thanks Kubuntu for rescueing me, I'm enjoying Linux like never before.

[Shimapan]

That's certainly good news for Kubuntu
Glückwunsch, Martin!

Thanks Martin for supporting Kubuntu. After Gnome3 disaster I was one step to move back to Windows. Thanks Kubuntu for rescueing me, I'm enjoying Linux like never before.

Yes, Gnome 3 is indeed a disaster.
When Kde 4 first came out, which wasn't even remotely as bad (I've been using it ever since 4.0), there was quite a lot of whining. With the Gnome 3 catastrophe, the complaining was nowhere near as bad, even if it would've been fully deserved there. Unity, Canonicals attempt at making Gnome 3 suck less, got much more complaints. If Canonical had been any smart, then, upon the release of Gnome 3, they would've kicked Gnome into the rubbish bin (or at least relegated it into "Gubunto" or something) and switched to Kde as main desktop for Ubuntu.

[capt-zero]

Thanks for the heads up Steve. I was first introduced to Kubuntu as my first foray into Linux. Seeing as there were several hundred different distros available, I fully expected to change to another distro after I got my feet wet. Since then I've checked out about a dozen or so and have yet to find one that suits my needs better than Kubuntu nor one that I can customize with such ease.

[jlittle]

When Kde 4 first came out...there was quite a lot of whining.

I'd have to say I was one of the whiners. But the complaint was that it wasn't ready, too much didn't work.

If Canonical had been any smart, then, upon the release of Gnome 3, they would've kicked Gnome into the rubbish bin (or at least relegated it into "Gubunto" or something) and switched to Kde as main desktop for Ubuntu.

I wonder how much the Qt ownership thing was part of that. Canonical seem to take open source ideals very seriously, and Qt's having an owner can be seen as a streak of impurity at the heart of KDE.


Regards, John Little

[vw72]

I'd have to say I was one of the whiners. But the complaint was that it wasn't ready, too much didn't work.

I wonder how much the Qt ownership thing was part of that. Canonical seem to take open source ideals very seriously, and Qt's having an owner can be seen as a streak of impurity at the heart of KDE.


Regards, John Little

Ubuntu uses QT for a number of things, so I don't think that is it.

[james147]

I wonder how much the Qt ownership thing was part of that. Canonical seem to take open source ideals very seriously, and Qt's having an owner can be seen as a streak of impurity at the heart of KDE.

All opensource projects have an owner (or more commonly referred to as a maintainer), just because it is open source does not mean someone does not own or control it. The main advantage to open source is that anyone can contribute to a project or fork it if then want to. If no one controls what gets added to a project then the project will end up being a messy heap of code so a sense of owner ship is still important in opensource software with the main advantage is that you can take owner ship of a fork when ever you want to.

[kubicle]

Canonical seem to take open source ideals very seriously, and Qt's having an owner can be seen as a streak of impurity at the heart of KDE.

1. I'd put Canonical somewhere in the bottom quarter among linux companies for "taking open source ideals seriously".
2. Like james147 already mentioned someone (the author or someone else) holds copyright over all open source code, it doesn't make it any less open source (what matters is the license under which it is made available)