SUSE and SLES switch to GNOME

[matthew]

http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/05/1620206

What an opportunity for kubuntu to fill in the gap for the KDE lovers out tere.

[linbetwin]

According to eWeek (http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1882118,00.asp), Novell is dumping KDE for GNOME. Sources within Novell claim that the recent rumours about Novell giving up SUSE were started by discontented KDE supporters. KDE will still ship with openSUSE.

[xequence]

Two posts about this in about the same time, though I think yours was first.

I think thats great they are moving to gnome. Gnome seems so much more professional to me.

[lotusleaf]

Yeah, now if they would only move from RPM to DEB. :P

[matthew]

Yeah, now if they would only move from RPM to DEB. :POne step at a time. :)

[NeoChaosX]

Almost, but the GNOME transition will not happen for free SUSE:


"The entire KDE graphical interface and product family will continue to be supported and delivered on OpenSuSE," said Mancusi-Ungaro.

[tikal26]

hey a guy replying to the osnews post saya that ubuntu might be in financiall trouble. Is he just talking is anoyone else heard anything like it?
by the way I don't care what its the default you can always chooce what to use.

[NeoChaosX]

The anonymous fellow said it was rumor, and that's probably all it is. I don't think a project financed by a South African billionaire would be in financial trouble anytime soon. ;)

[Anthem]

To clarify, it's not "Suse" that's moving to Gnome, but their server software. KDE will continue to be supported by Suse, as will Gnome. Suse currently has the best KDE installation out there, and I don't expect that to change (no offense to Kubuntu).

As for deb v rpm, I really don't care as long as they put together solid apt repositories.

[Qrk]

Well, SuSE 10 was a pretty good balance between Gnome and KDE. Previously Gnome in SuSE was like KDE in Fedora, just a little under devoloped. I hope they keep the nice balance, not have openSuSE become Gnome biased.

I'm not surprised. though. For some reason or another, Gnome is used more in the enterprise. RHEL, its clones, and Solaris all are gnomers. SuSE was the odd one out. Plus, Novell has always had a big part in Gnome, between evolution, beagel and all the old Ximian stuff.

[linbetwin]

And I thought KDE was more prevalent than GNOME in major distros.

[Sirin]

http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/05/1620206

What an opportunity for kubuntu to fill in the gap for the KDE lovers out tere.

All the reason to go to Mandriva! :)

[linbetwin]

BTW does anybody know which version of GNOME will be included in Dapper?

[tikal26]

so their desktop is still kde. I think that it makes sence when you look at their projects: mono, ifolder.

[Dr. Nick]

BTW does anybody know which version of GNOME will be included in Dapper?

2.14 most likely, The Ubuntu releases goal is to coincide with Gnome release

[linbetwin]

But what is GNOME 2.13? Is it the unstable version, like in kernels? I saw sources of 2.13 on ftp.gnome.org.

[Dr. Nick]

But what is GNOME 2.13? Is it the unstable version, like in kernels? I saw sources of 2.13 on ftp.gnome.org.

yeah, odd number versions are development. I have Gnome 2.13.1 right now by using the dapper repos. If you notice you usually only see mention of 2.4, 2.6, 2.8, 2.10, 2.12 etc on the internet.

[linbetwin]

You dist-upgraded to Dapper?! What is it, alpha0.0.0.1?

[Dr. Nick]

You dist-upgraded to Dapper?! What is it, alpha0.0.0.1?

Yeah I upgraded, doesnt seem any different except for version numbers :) I imagine in the next few months some changes will become apparent, its still very early in its cycle

[linbetwin]

Yeah, according to this DistroWatch page (http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=ubuntu), nothing is changed in Dapper yet.

[Dr. Nick]

My thoughts on the origional topic are similar to others. Its nice to have a choice of gnome/KDE within the same distro. I tried open suse with gnome and it just didn't feel right. A few of the gnome tools I used were not their by default and I couldnt find them in the package manager , yum is it?.

[NeoChaosX]

If you had read the original topic (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=86519) on this, you would find that the GNOME switch is only happening for their workstation and server products. They'll still offer KDE with the (Open)SUSE desktop.

[linbetwin]

SUSE 10.0 was a big dissapointment for me, because I couldn't connect to the Internet. Neither in Mandrake 10.1 or Debian Sarge. In fact Ubuntu was my first Linux distro and it worked flawlessly from the very beginning.

[Lovechild]

Victory!!

die KDE die die die..

*what.. as if you didn't expect me to be biased*

[Lovechild]

Yeah, now if they would only move from RPM to DEB. :P

Which would bring what advantage?

Do your homework before making a claim like that, moving to .deb isn't an immidiate technical improvement, properly written spec files for rpms provide exactly the same outcome as properly written DEBIAN files - so replacing one with the other is no more than "omfg teh l33tness of it all". Debian is not the end all technical superior platform, it has a lot of nice qualities, the social contract being just one of them, but technically the debian package format is a mere reinvention of the wheel.

I'm all for reinventing the wheel when it makes sense, but please don't waste time doing it just for the sake of it or that you don't like RedHat (if that's the case it's your business but you are in all likelihood misguided in your hatred of staunce community supporters and I urge you to reexamine your reasoning).

On the whole inventing another major packing format really only got the community fragmentation and duplication of effort.

Now is rpms the end all arguments best solution to ship software in, maybe not but is fragmentation the answer? Most certainly not, probably the most interesting packaging concept in recent history is not rpms nor debs - it's the conary system used by rpath, it features everything that is needed now and in the near future, it's a full python implementation that leans on the lessons learned from rpm, deb, portage and other buildtools. Not only that but it's a distributed system so you can derive your own branch from head (in this case rpath but imagine if every single software project registered their own vanilla package when issuing a new release to the main repo) as easy as scratching your neck. This makes it incredibly easy to get a well tested personalised distro with just the software you like and with minimal overlap over effort and testing.

So if I had a choice, let's all move to Conary for technical reasons.

*edit*


EDIT: This post has been edited by staff.

[gord]

well the advantage is that deb is a word you can say, rpm just sounds like ruppum, thats rather silly for a thing to be called.

[xequence]

Which would bring what advantage?

Honestly do people like you really research the differences between the rpm and the deb formats before posting such things?

Settle down. They mean deb has apt, rpm has yum.

Though I think a distro can use rpm and apt, or make their own like whatever mandriva has.

[poofyhairguy]

hey a guy replying to the osnews post saya that ubuntu might be in financiall trouble. Is he just talking is anoyone else heard anything like it?
by the way I don't care what its the default you can always chooce what to use.

Its a rumor. Mark has said he makes money off of investments than the entire Linux service industry, and he says that he expects at least a few more eyars of Ubuntu.

threads are merged.

[newbie2]

Victory!!

die KDE die die die..

*what.. as if you didn't expect me to be biased*
it is a consequence of the past i think...here are some history-links -->

"Perens said he supports the KDE project, but made it clear that the project would remain separate from UserLinux. "We'll have no problem sharing work with them, just as they share work through FreeDesktop.org and Debian today," he said in a statement. "But the decision to base UserLinux on Gnome stands."
He said he chose Gnome because of a desire not to include any proprietary elements in UserLinux. KDE's developer toolkit has a commercial licensing option"
http://asia.cnet.com/newstech/systems/0,39001153,39161991,00.htm

"Bruce Perens is one of the founders of the Open Source movement in software, and the creator of the Open Source Definition, the manifesto of Open Source. He is founder or co-founder of the Linux Standard Base, the standardization project of Linux, the UserLinux project, and No-Code International."
http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/special10_10/perens/index.html#a2

[Lovechild]

Settle down. They mean deb has apt, rpm has yum.

Though I think a distro can use rpm and apt, or make their own like whatever mandriva has.

Do you have any idea what you are talking about.. I seriously doubt it.

I ask about the package format advantage, and you start talking about the dependency resolver.

Historically what people call dependency hell did not come from the rpm format but rather the lack of a good resolver, debian decided to rewrite the format and add a proper second level resolver (apt-get). These days however all rpm distros ship a proper resolver (yum, urpmi, apt-rpm, etc.), the differences in the formats would mostly boil down to rpm .spec files being more readable than DEBIAN files (my opinion, to get an impression read some and decide).

Reinventing the wheel and spouting FUD is not a technical sound solution, I'm sorry as much as you and people like you would like to think that debs are endlessly superior to rpms it is just not true. Although Debian was the first distro to provide a succesful resolver it is far from outstanding today and the effort going into reinventing rpms would in all likelihood have been better spend writing a resolver for rpm.

*edit*


EDIT: This post has been edited by staff.