On Thu, 2005-12-15 at 21:27 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > Here's me.. holding my breath. There are much larger issues with > moving to a single cd Core than whether or not a single financial > application is in Core. > Until there is a clear signal that the definition of Core has changed > direction I'm not going to be working under the single CD goal > assumption. Someone is going to have the balls to move KDE and some > of that java crap over to Extras if you have a chance in hell of going > to one CD. I'll pay more attention to this argument as a serious > statement of policy direction once I see KDE move over. > > And I think the self-hosting restriction on whatever that 1 -cd "Core" > is going to be too tight a constraint and ultimately kill the goal of > a single cd that is in anyway usable to a mere mortal by itself. I > think the 1 cd goal will require a competely different restructuring, > and the brickwall between Core and Extras buildsystem is going to be a > big problem that is going to get in the way of that re-structuring. > Quite frankly i think everyone will have dvd burner drives by the time > Core is ready to make the infrstructure and policy jump to a single > cd.... which would be satisifyingly ironic. You've mistaken what I said. I'm not talking about a single CD core, I'm talking about targetted ISO sets created by bits of Core and bits of Extras, rolled into one ISO or one ISO set. Targetted for specific user sets. Fedora Office Linux, Fedora Gaming Linux, Fedora Server Linux, etc.. Yes these are vague targets, but less vague that Fedora itself. Once this happens, then it shouldn't / doesn't matter to the user if the package is in Core or Extras, as long as it is on the CD set they choose they can install it. > > We really need to combat the > > Extras is Second Class stigma going forward. > > You don't do that by pulling all functionality out of Core just to get > down to a single cd. Core has to be designed with some usage pattern > in mind, If Core usage case is going to be condensed to "web > browsing" fine, lets state that and pick the applications based on > that. and we live with the size of the distro that results. As it > stands I'm working under the assumption of "knowledge worker" as a > design goal for Core and I think that includes financial software more > strongly than say a bittorrent client or the gimp or emacs* I'm not trying to get to a single CD. However I would like to see the gtk1 reqs moved into Extras for now. Mostly because it is only supporting one app right now, gnucash. If there is a non-gtk1 replacement, thats great, lets swap it in and swap gnucash out, until gnucash is gtk2 ready, ready. -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub) Was I helpful? Let others know: http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=jkeating
