https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=481024
--- Comment #36 from Flossy Cat <flossy-...@online.de> ---
Dear Bernhard,
thanking you for your soothing words – but …
(In reply to Bernhard E. Reiter from comment #32)
> Dear @Flossy Cat,
>
> > I personally are very sick of this kind of discussion, of ill-advised
> > deprecations and functional regressions and the inherent lack of respect
> > thus expressed against the KDE user base
>
> it is sad to read about your frustrations with some KDE products like
> Kontact.
This is not about frustrations but about realizing facts and drawing
conclusions for the viability of further relying on KDE for my workflows.
Let's have a look together at what I perceive as facts here:
F1: It is completely normal for code changes to travel around 1–2 years
downstream from the development frontier to the end user.
F2: So many bugs and detrimental deprecation decisions will only discovered
then – that is 1–3 years down the line.
F3: KDE changes have – starting with the transition from KDE 3 to 4 – a long
history of very nasty surprises for their user base, with fundamental changes
and deprecations biting the users without early warning and time for proactive
measures.
F3.1: "Announcements" are typically in the style of the beginning of
"Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy": in some obscure, small mailing lists or the
commits some deprecation notice is given.
(I'd had to follow around 400 such sources to cover my SW base against nasty
surprises – CONCLUSION: not viable …)
F3.2: At least the deprecation and regression this bug is about as well as the
Bug 481069 both seemingly were decided by people either not having a sufficient
sophisticated use of the SW components they decide to deprecate or they didn't
care for the effect on the user community.
Evidence: Even very unsophisticated users of calendaring see the necessity for
flexible snoozing of reminders!
(Or the whole decision process is haphazard, not providing for any
consideration of stake holders, impact analysis, etc., and allowing for random
whims of individuals.)
CONCLUSION: I can not rely on KDE SW for long-term use anymore.
F3.3: Supporting F3.2, the explanations given so far for these decisions do not
hold water:
If you dive into the developer discussions around the deprecation leading to
the regression in Bug 481069, the primary argument is essentially "can not be
implemented on smartphones" …
The regression was defended with "we don't see any bug reports for this
component, so it is not used" – equivalent to saying: we deprecate all
functionality mature enough to not cause frequent bug reports anymore …
(Next absurd defense line: "we cannot learn real usage because of privacy" –
this in a discussion on "bugs.kde.org", which proliferates the mail-addresses
of the bug reporters like there is no tomorrow (I've burned several pseudonyms
here meanwhile – my suggestion to change this problematic behavior of
"bugs.kde.org" was not greeted with politeness …))
Similarly here with this bug: "we want to switch to a notification framework
available on smartphones" (and drop functionality without consideration of the
impact)
CONCLUSION: User experience and satisfaction ("no nasty surprises", functional
and UI continuity, etc.) is not taken in consideration and/or desktop
experience is no important consideration anymore -> I can not rely on KDE SW
for long-term use anymore.
F4: KDE is either not capable or willing to consider F1 and F2 and to correct
regressions in LTS versions at least 3 years backwards.
When David kindly fixed the regression in February the version 23.08 was just
half a year old and it was already known it will be part of LEAP 16.6 and SLE
16.6. This means users are stuck with this regressions for a long time – in
case of LEAP 16.6 at least till summer 2025.
CONCLUSION: That is not viable. I could use a workaround for the last 6 month
because of a hiatus, but not any longer. (And using OBS KDE to get a more
current version fails on numerous resolver complains, taking a lot of effort to
resolve and seemingly resulting in the choice to drop other SW – the effort
extends to several systems, not acceptable … The same is true of compiling from
source, as I would lose automatic security updates …)
F5: In both bug reports I offered my help and support for implementation as a
seasoned computer engineer if I'm pointed to introductory material or are
guided. No reaction to this offer …
CONCLUSION: Active support is either not wanted or needed.
OVERALL CONCLUSIONS:
1. KDE does not care for its user base and does not respect the time, effort
and love sophisticated users invested in sophisticated KDE working environment,
which shine and promote KDE.
2. This leads to a vicious circle and downward spiral of the user base and
their support (take me as an example)
FINAL CONCLUSION:
With Kontact as last application strongly profiting from running under KDE
natively gone, I will migrate to my fallback GUI environment XFCE (honed and
kept since the KDE3->4 desaster) and drop Kontact as my PIM.
> I can relate because I've experienced regressions a number of times
> myself. It is good and helpful that you report that those missing or
> regressing features are very important to you.
That is part of my active support of FOSS since the eighties …
> But also - as I see from your lines cited above - you come to the conclusion
> that those changes are deliberate and thus a disrespect towards you or users
> in general. Without knowing how those changes came to be in detail, you
> cannot know that.
I did the detailed research – see above.
> I don't know either, but how would you react to a user of
> your software that approaches you with this conclusion that you meant "ill"
> by making a change without knowing that you may have been forced to do it by
> some technical circumstances or budget limitations? Is that reaction helpful?
See above. It demonstrates fundamentally flawed approaches and processes.
If you, Bernhard (other kind souls in this bug thread are cordially welcome
too), will
support the discussion in discuss.kde.org, I will give it a last try.
(But not delay my migration.)
> All desktop email clients struggle with getting enough workforce behind
> them, either by volunteers or professionals.
I know – for that reason I offered active programming support. But see F5 …
> … You were asking for alternatives, I know of Claws mail which has is a
> small but long term team behind it.
Thanks. I'll give it a look.
> And Kontact3 from Trinity which has the user defined snoozing still in.
I tried. While I still think KDE3 was the best desktop so far and Trinity is
doing a good job to keep it, it also stagnates and, IMHO, is doomed to wither.
Kontact3 alas lacks a few features of Kontact5 I actually use …
Best regards,
Flossy Cat
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
