On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 05:23:34PM +0300, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote: >> That is an even more unlikely scenerio. Talk to the people involved a >> bit and you'll realize this: >> >> <zeenix> [16:48:51] is there any intentions still to do installer for gnome? >> <zeenix> [16:49:52] hughsie: poettering: owen: ^ >> <zeenix> [16:50:19] the installer question, not ramcq's kudos :) >> <hughsie> [16:50:44] zeenix, not by me, mclasen would kill me >> <mclasen> [16:51:23] zeenix: what would the installer do ? >> <zeenix> [17:00:51] mclasen: install gnome? :) >> <zeenix> [17:01:09] i guess the answer is 'no' then >> <ebassi> [17:12:12] zeenix: I guess the actual question would be: what >> does "install gnome" mean? >> <mclasen> [17:15:20] wget >> http://build.gnome.org/ostree/buildmaster/images/z/current/gnome-ostree-x86_64-runtime.qcow2.gz >> ? >> <zeenix> [17:20:39] ebassi: i don't know. I'm just curious > > This does not answer the question about how you get GNOME on a brand new > machine, my feeling from GUADEC was that some people wanted to address such > a need. You are not going to achieve that with a qcow2 image. Of course not but you either do it with GNOME-shipping distribution or an live ISO (if you just want to try it out) and such ISO would ideally be produced by ostree (gnome-continuous now) and not through fedora. GNOME OS does not aim to be be a distribution on its own and if we start doing installers, thats essentially what it is. Having said that, I had a bit of chat with Ray about GNOME ISOs: <zeenix> so these gnome ISOs, just need to know if you intend to do those again? <zeenix> and if so, would you do it using fedora or make use of ostree? <halfline> the plan is to do some for .92 <halfline> i don't think i'm going to go back to trying to use ostree for a bit <halfline> it was a time sink last night <halfline> i do want to do that eventually <halfline> but not for .92 <zeenix> ah ok <zeenix> i wanted to know for adding gnome info to libosinfo <zeenix> seems we'll have to add two different entries <halfline> makes sense <halfline> i'd call one entry "GNOME Continuous" <halfline> since walters just renamed it <halfline> (gnome-ostree is now called gnome-continuous) <zeenix> one for the ostree based images (or isos in future) and one for fedora-based ISOs <halfline> suboptimal to have both, i know <zeenix> halfline: so post .92 <zeenix> any motivation for doing a fedora-based ISO for 3.10.0 ? <halfline> potentially. <halfline> if 3.9.92 doesn't end up being problematic and i don't switch to gnome-continous before 3.10 <halfline> i'll probably do another run with fedora for 3.10.0 So yes, it seems I was wrong to conclude that such ISOs are unlikely. Such a shame that we'll have create two entries and more in future if Ray still doesn't manage to get gnome-continuous produce an ISO. Lets hope he succeeds in 3.12 time. -- Regards, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) FSF member#5124 _______________________________________________ Libosinfo mailing list Libosinfo@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libosinfo
