MX Linux Forum

KBD wrote: Thu Sep 10, 2020 7:32 pm ... perhaps has burned out on Linux.

I've been reading his reviews for a long long time, and he's never made any secret of the fact that he is/was using windows for his main production machine. He believes it's better for writing and games.
Tell that to the people on this forum who use MX as their production OS.
I used to find myself agreeing with a lot, but his sarcastic negativity has finally done me in.

His first few sentences tell the tale: he's become burned out on doing Linux distro reviews. He really shouldn't have even written this one, that being the case, as there was no way he'd approach MX-KDE with an open mind and his review reflects that. It seems like his major complaints about all distros is that they don't have Shiny New Stuff. He's apparently never read the Don't Break Debian page in the Debian Wiki: https://wiki.debian.org/DontBreakDebian ... f_Syndrome

I agree with his basic premise that using the Debian Stable version of KDE is always going to put you extremely far behind in terms of the latest features. Literally multiple years behind. Which means to me that the Debian Stable version of KDE really can't be the long term solution.

Where I disagree strongly with Igor (the real person behind Dedo) is I think that MX KDE is a fantastic release. Really nearly perfect in the way it showcases how the MX tools and concepts can blend so perfectly with the KDE desktop and default programs. It's as if KDE is still deeply embedded in the MX DNA from the Mepis days.

Adrian wrote: Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:29 pm

tony37 wrote: Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:19 pm

Adrian wrote: Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:08 pmMX KDE is not for people running for after new shiny objects (they can use Arch or Neor or something else as he pointed out).

Makes sense. But he'd probably say that you should have used Plasma 5.12 then, because that's a LTS release. But I suppose this is a bit difficult when you're based on Debian.

We of course considered that, but there are Qt library problems. From what I've heard from packagers we'd have to have KDE on different Qt library then the rest of Debian Buster applications. We don't subject our users to breakage just to have a higher version number.

I actually didn't talk about using a higher version, but a lower (LTS) version. That would have gotten complaints too of course. But it's just something to think about: how important is it to use an LTS Plasma version? It would of course be ideal if Debian used the LTS versions for its Stable releases (as Kubuntu does). But I'm probably just dreaming there.

I don't know how Debian maintainers decide which version is included in a particular stable release.

According to this: https://wiki.debian.org/KDE#KDE.27s_software_in_Debian

Debian stretch had plasma 5.8.6, and buster has 5.14. 5.12 is in between the 2 Debian releases.

Debian Unstable currently has plasma 5.17, even though 5.18 LTS has been out for some time. Who knows if Debian Bullseye (now Testing) will get 5.18 eventually.

Depending on the timing of various releases of Qt versus Debian, it might be easier or harder to backport Plasma LTS to MX's current release. Plasma 5.18 was not possible for MX19/Buster.

Not sure if 5.12 could be built on Buster base but I agree with you that going with 5.12 LTS might have led to even more complaints from various MX users, since it would probably have even less finish and fewer features.

For instance, the blur desktop effect only came out in 5.13. https://www.techrepublic.com/article/ho ... -kde-5-13/

If a user is into Plasma for eye candy, going with 5.12 means you miss out on all the pretty Kvantum themes utilising blur (and blur effect in konsole).

Maybe it's a superficial reason, but it's part of the fun of Plasma, IMO.

asqwerth wrote: Fri Sep 11, 2020 7:00 amDebian Unstable currently has plasma 5.17, even though 5.18 LTS has been out for some time. Who knows if Debian Bullseye (now Testing) will get 5.18 eventually.

From what I can gather, they are stuck with 5.17.x for Debian Bullseye, which won't be due until early next year, by then which KDE 5.20 or 5.21 would have been released. It beggars belief that they aren't considering the 5.18 LTS release, given the sheer amount of time between now and Debian Bullseye.

asqwerth wrote: Fri Sep 11, 2020 7:00 amDepending on the timing of various releases of Qt versus Debian, it might be easier or harder to backport Plasma LTS to MX's current release. Plasma 5.18 was not possible for MX19/Buster.

The 5.18 LTS release depends on the same library versions as 5.19 (give or take some), so this is highly unlikely to happen.

asqwerth wrote: Fri Sep 11, 2020 7:00 amNot sure if 5.12 could be built on Buster base but I agree with you that going with 5.12 LTS might have led to even more complaints from various MX users, since it would probably have even less finish and fewer features.

For instance, the blur desktop effect only came out in 5.13. https://www.techrepublic.com/article/ho ... -kde-5-13/

If a user is into Plasma for eye candy, going with 5.12 means you miss out on all the pretty Kvantum themes utilising blur (and blur effect in konsole).

The other problem is that 5.12 LTS is not really supported anymore. There have been no new 5.12.x releases since September 2019, so it's not even worth considering IMO.

AK-47 wrote: Fri Sep 11, 2020 7:11 am The other problem is that 5.12 LTS is not really supported anymore. There have been no new 5.12.x releases since September 2019, so it's not even worth considering IMO.

LTS apparently means two years of support, which isn't that much. Then Dedo's comments make even less sense.

One thing which is fine in 5.14 but not in recent releases are the icons in 'Recent Documents'. It makes 'Recent Documents' pretty useless if I can't see if something is a folder or a text file.

Speaking only for myself, from the start of this project my realistic aims and views for MX19-KDE were:

1. Plasma 5.14 was good enough to work with (I'd installed KDE-Standard on top of a MX19 VM and also one of my real metal installs to test for some time).
2. MX can't give users the latest Plasma, but it can give users a stable and efficient Plasma workhorse that comes with the MX DNA (tools, tweaks).

Norbert Preining said the Debian KDE devs are finally working with him on trying to incorporate his 5.19 packages into unstable, which should then work their way into testing. So, by the time the next version of Debian is released, if all goes well then they should be using some version of KDE that's at 5.19 or beyond.

Therefore I should update my earlier post - sticking with the Debian Stable version of KDE might give packages that are fairly recent if the Debian KDE team makes a lot of progress between now and next summer.

What the author told about kde version on mx,
I have read some where that Debian don't include the lts version of Plasma due to some reason may be copyright things or something else.
Debian release its kde one below or above LTS version of kde.

But I may say the latest kde on Kubuntu or Manjaro though looks fine and Useful features includes, but some bugs remain which is very less on Debian and so MX kde spin.

Debian uses KDE Plasma 5.14. I was also surprised the Debian team picked up a non-LTS version of Plasma. Using Plasma 5.12 LTS would make more sense. I think having a very outdated version of KDE Plasma (along with some other major KDE software) is one of the main disadvantages of Debian.

It might also be relevant that the bug-fixes would be consistent with the goal of stability of Debian stable - so a more recent version often means better stability (or at least it could mean that).
So many kde users think So, despite love for Debian or MX and Plasma 5, have to conclude Debian 10 KDE or MX kde is not the best option on the market.

The main reason MX KDE gets some mix reactions is that other distros provide better Plasma 5 experience.

Technically, it would be possible to upload a newer version of KDE Plasma to the Debian 10 backports; currently that would be 5.17.5 since that’s what’s in testing. Given the number of packages involved, at least if you want to provide the full KDE package set, that would represent a considerable amount of work.

But may be in next kde of Mx we may consider using Debian stable with Plasma from Debian’s back-ports (Like neon which based on Ubuntu LTS but Plasma LTS updated)?????