SEP
11
2003

KDE 3.2 Alpha 1 Finally on FTP

I've finally managed to get the last bits of the KDE 3.2 Alpha 1 (codenamed "Brokenboring") including KDevelop 3.0 Alpha 6
on the ftp server. The mirrors should soon pick it up.

There won't be any binary packages for this release because the KDE "Pi"
release is coming out soon. Everyone using Brokenboring is asked to
compile it with --enable-debug, so that we can get valuable feedback. There is a new unstable version of Konstruct also available to install it.

Other than that, feel free to play around with things, check if your bugs
are still there or if there are places where you can help. Check
the KDE 3.2 feature plan
for things to look for.

The code is quite rough in many places, but many of the developers
use it on a daily base and kdepim has improved so much that you can't live without it once you've tried it. :)

Thanks to everyone who convinced me that the code is good enough for
a release when I was tempted to drop the idea altogether. Just one final wish: check
for duplicates before you file bug reports and compile with debug information enabled
before reporting crashes -- you might find tons of bugs, but with
debugging information the chances we can fix them are much higher.

Comments

Thanks for making this release Stephan, we'll stop bugging you now. (well for a day or two...).

Rich.


By Richard Moore at Wed, 2003/09/10 - 5:00am

Does anyone know if the context menus have being cleaned up in this release?

Here is one of the references http://dot.kde.org/1062916070/1062922457/ regarding the issue, which is going on for too long IMHO.


By JigSaw at Wed, 2003/09/10 - 5:00am

Why don't you install the Alpha and see yourself? They partly have been.


By Anonymous at Wed, 2003/09/10 - 5:00am

Because I have an old AMD K6 400 Mhz, and it will take, literally, days to compile the whole KDE and the other Qt/kde apps that might need recompilation because of the upgrade. I will have to wait for binaries at some point, or for a distro in the future to include it by default.


By JigSaw at Wed, 2003/09/10 - 5:00am

From discussions on the usability list, I'd say that they have been cleaned up a lot, but that there are also lots of contentious items left in the menus, and lots of conflicting ideas as to what should appear and what shouldn't. Hopefully all major issues will be resolved by 3.2 final.

If you have the time, consider subscribing to the usability mailing list and posting your suggestions. Checking CVS HEAD or 3.1 alpha 1 versions make things easier, as does checking the archives, just to make sure you're not suggesting something that has already been discussed/fixed.


By Tom at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

I remember a kde traffic announcing a knoppix based on kde CVS project. is it dead or what?


By pat at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

thanx a lot ! :)


By pat at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

Does Apples KHTML and KJSCRIPT enhancements get included in 3.2 or will it be 3.3 before they are included.


By Roberto J. Dohnert at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

Much of the original changes have already been merged in, but Apple has made many more changes before Safari 1.0 hit (and no doubt, they are still making changes as we speak), some of which has not been merged in.


By anon at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

Is it a high priority to integrate Apple's code? It really should be, but doesn't sound like there's a great deal of emphasis on it. The most exciting thing about 3.2 is definately going to be seeing what Konqueror is like. I'm not going to try any releases until 3.2 final comes out so hopefully I'll get blown away!


By foo at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

I think you'll be impressed. Right now it is fast, renders almost all pages well. It is a little unstable at this moment, but will get better at release.

The only time I fire up mozilla now is when the cvs version is broken. It works for all that I use it for, banking, browsing, kmplayer plugin, etc.

Derek


By Derek Kite at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

what is the reason that konqueror seems to render pages in multiple stages?
Especially opening huge sites you can see some reformattings (fonts,tables) which isn't very nice. Gecko-based browsers have solved this issue, Opera does it less often.
Does anybody know the reasons of this annoying effect and if it is been worked on?

greetings,
katakombi >8^)


By katakombi at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

It's useful for slow internet connection, you can start
to read text before of loading all html/images.

Konq is really good here.


By Dmitry at Fri, 2003/09/12 - 5:00am

It's a life saver on dialup.


By Anonymous at Sat, 2003/09/13 - 5:00am

I have a kinda silly question. The website www.newz.dk has been broken in konqueror since they changed their layout, but works in all the other browsers I have tested. So can anyone tell me if this is a bug in konqueror or in the website itself and if I should repport it at bugs.kde.org (searching for similar bugs turned out too many results for me to wade through)?


By Mikkel Schubert at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

How is it broken? It looks to mee as if it renders just fine, but then again I have no clue what so ever on how it really should look:-)
But as it looks, it looks as if it is rendered correctly. Nice site, think I have to check it out some more.
Here at CBS we're using SiteScape for our e-Learning system, and THAT is rendered completely wrong. All menues (javascript) are not displayed.
There is a TreeView where you can gain quick access to forums teams and such this tree is not displayed at all, and many more things.
I like that konqueror is quickly loaded when you want to access a web site and I like that it is so integrated into KDE, but I really think that there is just too many things that konqueror cannot do.
To me it is not usable at all. I just use it to quickly look up some page, but in dayly usage at work I dont use it. Even though I would like to. I have also tried this new release, and I really cannot see any real changes to the items I think is missing/not working.


By Jarl E. Gjessing at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

I've had similar experiences with Lotus Quickplace and Konqueror. But anyway, it says that Internet Explorer is needed. Most (commercial) web-based knowledge management systems I know make extensive use of IEs capabilities. No way to get decent results with any OS browser at all.


By thomas at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

If you read the user comments you will see that the positioning is a little off. I am testing this with KDE 3.1.3.

smeat!


By SMEAT! at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

A little off? =)
This is what I get using a cvs build a couple of days old:
Konqueror: http://vazagi.homepage.dk/screen2.jpg
Opera: http://vazagi.homepage.dk/screen1.jpg


By Mikkel Schubert at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

If kde people want to hack their browser a bit, just try to get http://www.geek.com/ working!

Kinda blank page atleast on konqueror ;-)...


By Nobody at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

Oh my god the creators of that site should be hauled of and SHOT for such crappy coding. Look at the page source. It is using a lot of javascript document.write stuff and it checks for browser ident. If you tell konq to identify itself as ie, ns4 and some others it works just not in its default config. I would be hard pressed to find crappier code then that. Maybe not rendering that site should be a feature. :)


By kosh at Fri, 2003/09/12 - 5:00am


By Nobody at Fri, 2003/09/12 - 5:00am

It looks fine in my konq. Just as in your Opera snapshot!
Strange


By Jarl E. Gjessing at Fri, 2003/09/12 - 5:00am

It renders incorrectly for me in CVS HEAD from 2 days ago.

Which version are you using? 3.1x? (if this is the case, then this might be a regression)


By Troels Tolstrup at Sun, 2003/09/14 - 5:00am

I think i isolated the problem, and have filed a bug report:

http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=64286


By Troels Tolstrup at Sun, 2003/09/14 - 5:00am

Shouldn't the codename be "brockenboring", with a C? Without it it gives a different impression :-/


By ac at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

What is brockenboring anyway? Someone clue me in!


By Navindra Umanee at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

Lord of the Rings I believe.


By Chris Howells at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am


By cm at Fri, 2003/09/12 - 5:00am

I think that coolo once mentioned that "brockenborin" is a city in GB, not sure though.


By MK at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

This is a definitive list of all cities in Great Britain:

Aberdeen, Aberdeenshire
Bangor, Caernarfonshire
Bath, Somerset
Birmingham, Warwickshire
Bradford, Yorkshire
Brighton & Hove, Sussex
Bristol, Gloucestershire
Cambridge, Cambridgeshire
Canterbury, Kent
Cardiff, Glamorganshire
Carlisle, Cumberland
Chester, Cheshire
Chichester, Sussex
Coventry, Warwickshire
Derby, Derbyshire
Dundee, Angus
Durham, County Durham
Edinburgh, Midlothian
Ely, Cambridgeshire
Exeter, Devon
Glasgow, Lanarkshire
Gloucester, Gloucestershire
Hereford, Herefordshire
Inverness, Invernessshire
Kingston-upon-Hull, Yorkshire
Lancaster, Lancashire
Leeds, Yorkshire
Leicester, Leicestershire
Lichfield, Staffordshire
Lincoln, Lincolnshire
Liverpool, Lancashire
London, Middlesex
Manchester, Lancashire
Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Northumberland
Newport, Monmouthshire
Norwich, Norfolk
Nottingham, Nottinghamshire
Oxford, Oxfordshire
Peterborough, Northamptonshire
Plymouth, Devon
Portsmouth, Hampshire
Preston, Lancashire
Ripon, Yorkshire
Salford, Lancashire
Salisbury, Wiltshire
Sheffield, Yorkshire
Southampton, Hampshire
St Albans, Hertfordshire
St David's, Pembrokeshire
Stirling, Stirlingshire
Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire
Sunderland, County Durham
Swansea, Glamorganshire
Truro, Cornwall
Wakefield, Yorkshire
Wells, Somerset
Westminster, Middlesex
Winchester, Hampshire
Wolverhampton, Staffordshire
Worcester, Worcestershire
York, Yorkshire


By Anonymous Coward at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

Unfortunately that list puts lots of cities in the wrong counties. So it's not really definitive. eg. Newcastle-upon-tyne is in Tyne and Wear not Northumberland, Manchester is a county in itself (Greater Manchester) etc.

Rich.


By Richard Moore at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

And where is Belfast? Isn't that in GB?


By Jan at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

I believe that Northern Ireland doesn't count as GB, even though it's in the UK.


By anonymous bastard at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

Quoting from my passport, "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland".

So Belfast is in Northern Ireland, while Wales, Scotland and England are in Great Britain. But all of them are in the United Kingdom. Nice and simple isn't it :)


By Chris Howells at Fri, 2003/09/12 - 5:00am

It's pretty simple. Great Britain is the largest island of the British Isles ... so Scotland, England and Wales are in (on?) Great Britain. So the countries of Great Britain, and the province of Northern Ireland together are known as the United Kingdom. Just remember that Great Britain is an island, and used as the collective name for the countries within it, and it all makes sense!


By Ed Moyse at Sat, 2003/09/13 - 5:00am

You are mixing up administrative areas with counties.
Northumberland, Lancashire, etc have existed for close on a thousand years.
Then in 1888 administrative areas (or county councils) were formed that shared the same boundaries as the counties. It's these administrative areas that have been messed around with, not the ancient counties they were based on. In the case of the two administrative areas you speak of 'Tyne & Wear' and 'Greater Manchester' were created in 1974 and abolished in 1985. Eleven years of existance of a council area does not change close to a thousand years of where a place is!!!

There is a lot more info at http://www.abcounties.co.uk


By Anonymous Coward at Thu, 2003/10/02 - 5:00am

Peterborough is in Cambridgeshire


By Jon at Mon, 2003/11/24 - 6:00am

No, it's not: geographically, Peterborough is in the county of Northamptonshire (with the exception of those suburbs situated south of the Nene, which are in the county of Huntingdonshire); always has been (well, since AD 1011, anyway), always will be.

What is true, though, is that Peterborough has been in a number of different *administrative* areas since formal local government was created in 1888. However, administrative areas (including "administrative counties") are NOT the same as counties. Here is a potted history of Peterborough's top-tier local government:

►1889-1965: Peterborough was in the administrative county of the Soke of Peterborough (described in the Local Government Act 1888 as a division of the geographical county of Northamptonshire).

►1965-1974: Soke of Peterborough CC was merged with Huntingdonshire CC (as both authorities were deemed too small for local government purposes) to create Huntingdon & Peterborough CC.

►1974-1998: Huntingdon & Peterborough CC was merged with Cambridgeshire & Isle of Ely CC to form "Cambridgeshire" CC.

►1998- : Peterborough City Council was made a unitary authority, independent of Cambridgeshire CC.

As you can see, residents of Peterborough have been subject to rather confusing local government arrangements over the years, with three major local government changes over the last four decades: isn't it simpler just to use the geographical county, safe in the knowledge that this will never change?!

For everything except local government, Peterborough is in NORTHAMPTONSHIRE.

If you'd like more information about the counties of Great Britain (and how they differ from administrative areas), please visit http://www.abcounties.co.uk

Olly =)


By Olly at Wed, 2003/11/26 - 6:00am

why have you only got some of the cities and towns. i needed all of them for my home work!!!! :(


By bethan shortman at Sun, 2006/11/26 - 6:00am

I thought it was a play on the IKEA slogan "unböring"...


By dOxxx at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

I tried Konqueror (the web browser) recently using the CVS version and many rendering bugs seems to have been fixed.

Obviously, KDE 3.2 will be a great release. I wonder why there is so little pro-KDE comments on Slashdot compared to pro-Gnome comments.


By Ned Flanders at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

If you're referring to today's article about GNOME 2.4, it's probably because the item was about GNOME, some comments about KDE are off-topic unless they relate to GNOME.


By Tom at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

No, I'm not only referring to today's article. Even in KDE related articles there seems to be a lot of pro-Gnome comments. Maybe I'm wrong, I'll see when KDE 3.2 will be released.


By Ned Flanders at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

The GNOME trolls are just better organized. It means nothing else.


By ac at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

>> I wonder why there is so little pro-KDE comments on Slashdot compared to pro-Gnome comments.

Simple: GNOME is all about polish these days, KDE not really.

(use of the Keramik theme and those nice Crystal icons does not make KDE more polished, just a bit nicer to look at)


By whoopie at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

One word. . . RedHat(e)


By Rick at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

Please don't feed the trolls.


By Bob at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

Does it matter?


By Joergen Ramskov at Thu, 2003/09/11 - 5:00am

Pages