Christophe, On Thu, 2013-09-12 at 11:31 +0200, Christophe Fergeau wrote: > On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 06:43:58PM +0300, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 5:52 PM, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > You are missing my point, I'm saying that ostree based images are very > > > different from the GNOME live CDs that are already listed in libosinfo > > > database, > > > > And that is simply not true. They are both GNOME. The fact that <=3.8 > > media were based on fedora was an implementation detail that is pretty > > irrelevant. They are both still the same OS. > > From a user point of view, this could be the way the GNOME project wants to > market these images. From a libosinfo internal representation point of > view, I think this 'implementation detail' is significant enough for us to > represent them differently. Different base OS can also mean differences in > hardware supported by the image. > > The live cd and these ostree images are very different things, let's > represent them _internally_ as different OSes (note that I haven't said > anything about the user-visible OS names). I didn't get why represent them as different OSes *only* because they come from a different base OS? Could you enlighten my mind? The final result is the same and I think this is what really matters for the application developers and it would not cause any kind of breakage for them, exactly the opposite from my point of view. > > Christophe > > _______________________________________________ > Libosinfo mailing list > Libosinfo@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libosinfo Best Regards, -- Fabiano Fidêncio _______________________________________________ Libosinfo mailing list Libosinfo@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libosinfo
