exactly zero as i don't use it
I let QT5 compile and just walk away. When I come back i save the package and use on my other machines.
It is not a big issue since QT5 isn't releasing every two days or weeks,
If Slackware was to release every year and over that time I had to build my DE twice I'd still use it, perhaps i'd switch to a lighter DE (or even fluxbox with companions) but I think i still would find Slackware attractive over the other options
But sbotools offer fully functional dependency resolution - it's only the base OS that is considered "monolithic".
But, again, SBo has dependency tracking and it works quite well and Slackware as a core OS still can remain monolithic - all is fine.
It is not the ports I'm after, I only want the OS to be OS and the bloat to be carried by those who use it- each to their own.

Since i don't use the massive KDE infrastructure at all - I feel I am at loss for waiting on Slackware to maintain it and bear with it - and IMHO Slackware isn't about any DE in particular - especially since it lives on quite happily after tossing Gnome out - Gnome that gave quite more to the whole GNU universe than KDE IMHO to begin with (at the very least an actually functional and snappy spreadsheet app).

And that comes from me a years long KDE user and fan that came to the point of realization that it simply sin't worth my time.

1 members found this post helpful.

KDE isn't what's holding up the next Slackware release.

GNOME was dropped because it was a large and uncoordinated mess of miscellaneous parts which took too long to collate and compile.
I'm a CLI guy, but I think that KDE brings a lot of value to the table. It's very much a feature complete desktop... Little things like allowing me to connect to my office VPN and rdp into my Windows machines... Out of the box, without adding anything.

1 members found this post helpful.

*business owner*
So what's this thing called current?

*IT guy*
It's a work in progress that will be called stable once the guy behind it thinks it's good enough

*business owner*
And you want to install it here?

*IT guy*
Yep!

*business owner*
The thing the guy behind it doesn't think is good enough?

...

4 members found this post helpful.

You just quoted me (I played both parts).

Which is why I left -current for my home computer.

It was at one point, but we're past it now.
However if we wait long enough the next point will come by and it will become an issue again...
More or less what's became of KDE nowdays
Yeah, until the clueless user borks it up and you have to intervene again and again at nauseam - been there, done that.

On the other hand:
XFCE, while admittedly in need of some more "holding of hand" at the start, once set up - just works and does not get borked up for quite a while of use (and abuse) by a clueless user - try it and maybe You get by as i did?

Again - this is jut my personal take to the matter:

If it would help Slackware maintenance in the long run i'd drop all big DEs in favor of a rock solid and more frequent release of the core OS.

If there are any pitfalls, aside of "convenience of use" and "out of the box "just works"" I would like to be informed/learning of that/them.

Kind thanks for all the info thus far and from this point forward

KDE's source is big, but very well coordinated.

You can leave it to compile and come back to a set of packages. It's not like GNOME at all.

True:

- You can come back to a set of packages - I found I can barely use (they work as intended alright, but they fail to work as i deem useful (sorry)

- Unlike Gnome - you have to fight it. It stubbornly works against you and refuses until you subdue it into submission - but once done and over - you're left with packages that work and are able to produce meaningful results.

One way or the other - there is no easy way.

And no, I would not like Gnome back - fine thanks.

Yet Gnome is there and can be obtained as a SBo set of (mostly building fine) packages