Should I mention kde-3.3.1?

[Frank Schmitt]

Rex Dieter <rdieter at math.unl.edu> writes:

> Frank Schmitt wrote:
>
>> 3.3.1 is pure bug-fixing. But why should I rant about it, I more and
>> more get the impression that Fedora tries its best to produce the worst
>> possible experience for KDE users.
>
> What makes you think that?  Of late, IMHO, RedHat/Fedora has been
> doing a fabulous job with KDE, so I'd be interested in hearing how you
> think their effort is lacking.  You even go as far as implying they
> purposely make KDE bad, which is, also IMO, uncalled for.

-There were no Core 2 packages for 3.0
-It's not possible to get mp3-support by installing an additional RPM
 like it is for gnome, you have to recompile kdemultimedia.
-Since KDE 3.3 it's more difficult to recompile kdemultimedia as the
 SRPM includes patched sources, you have to go to ftp.kde.org and get
 the original sources and place them in RPMBUILDIR/src manually
-kdemultimedia has random applications disabled without stating a reason
 for this anywhere. Juk or Amarok, I don't recall exactly, in KDE 3.2
 and 3.3.0, koncd in 3.3.1
-Automatic login with kdm doesn't work since 3.2 
-KDE 3.3.1 won't be in Core 3 but come as "one of the first updates",
 meaning that I'll have to download about 200 mb some days after I
 downloaded Core 3.

-- 
Did you ever realize how much text fits in eighty columns? If you now consider
that a signature usually consists of up to four lines, this gives you enough
space to spread a tremendous amount of information with your messages. So seize
this opportunity and don't waste your signature with bullshit nobody will read.