KDE 4.3 sucks, too
It’s been a while since I ranted that KDE 4.2 sucks, so I figured it was a time to give an update, just in case someone is still wondering whether 4.3 sucks, too.
It’s been a while since I ranted that KDE 4.2 sucks, so I figured it was a time to give an update, just in case someone is still wondering whether 4.3 sucks, too.

Facebook warning
I have sinned. I joined Facebook on 2009-05-17. As of writing this, I have 80+ acquaintances on my friend list. I’ve tested out the Facebook Mobile as well. It seems to be surprisingly usable.
The issues that come to mind now:
What I haven’t tested yet:
Interesting things:
All in all, not as horrible as I imagined it would be. But you’ve sold your soul anyway.

… and I’m going to use it as an example of free software projects being capable of marketing crap as a good product.
I’m almost wishing KDE 3.5 gets forked and developed in a sane manner. And I’ve even considered testing out Gnome.

The people who said KDE 4.2 rocks, meant “in comparison to 4.1 or 4.0.” If KDE 4.2 is good in comparison to those, I never want to find out how horrible the earlier versions were.
Now, normally you’d start making bug reports about issues you find, but if the overall quality is sour crud, it’d make more sense to report what works.
And the answer to that is “a lot less than in KDE 3.5.”
I earlied ranted about Freshmeat being slow on approving submissions, but based on the Freshmeat Support discussions, it seems the problem lies in their new software that makes some releases pending approval invisible to the admins. And the oddities don’t end there…
No idea whether just releases submitted within a given period are affected. In any case, I hope they patch it up.
I just noticed that the ViewGit release announcement I submitted almost two weeks ago is still pending on Freshmeat. Maybe they are busy rounding the corners on the new site look?
Looks like Microsoft’s web spider is crawling sites repoting fake (spam) referrals coming from live.search.com. These referrals are completely bogus and if you look at the keywords, it’s quite obvious.
Timeline from my point of view:
From the Seagate knowledge base (emphasis mine):
A firmware issue has been identified that affects a small number of Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 hard drive models which may result in data becoming inaccessible after a power-off/on operation. The affected products are Barracuda 7200.11, Barracuda ES.2 SATA, and DiamondMax 22.
Small number of drives? From what I can tell is that there is a really a lot more of affected drives than “a small number”. For a very long time Seagate also claimed this affected only disks manufactured “thru December 2008″ which was either outright lie, or a clever way to confuse people about the real scale of the issues. I bought my disk over nine months ago, and it is affected, too.
Based on the low risk as determined by an analysis of actual field return data, Seagate believes that the affected drives can be used as is. However, as part of our commitment to customer satisfaction, Seagate is offering a free firmware upgrade.
In the unlikely event your drive is affected and you cannot access your data, the data still resides on the drive and there is no data loss associated with this issue.
Very assuring. Not. I didn’t need to ask around much until I found someone who recently had a Seagate drive fail on boot.
All in all, the way how Seagate reacted to this issue and downplayed it has made me firmly decided not to buy Seagate for a while. If this isn’t a PR disaster, I don’t know what is.
For a few years distributed revision control systems have been picking up speed especially in free software projects, but increasingly so in companies and organisations as well. While the problem of “disconnected” working on code was solved by the distributed revision control model, what remained was the fact that issue tracking still couldn’t be done in a truly distributed manner.
I recently noticed that one of the channels I had been chatting on was being logged, and made publicly available for search engines to index. There’s nothing new about public logging of IRC – in past I’ve run into channels that announce public logging in the topic, and sometimes chosen to refrain from contributing to the discussion. However, the way I discovered the logging this time was a much less comfortable – I ran into the logs when googling for something…
I have to admit I wasn’t expecting to get my SourceForge project registration rejected this morning when I submitted it, but I guess it happens. They wouldn’t have an approval process in place otherwise, would they?