On 06/10/2009 08:47 AM, William Jon McCann wrote: > If I were working on a KDE desktop that is based on Fedora packages > the first thing I would do is make sure I differentiate it from Fedora > since Fedora is a GNOME based project - and that is not going to > change. GNOME is not upstream for Fedora in it's entirety. Without GNOME, there would still be a viable Fedora Project. Where did you get the impression Fedora is a GNOME based project? Did and does this project not base itself on all of our passion and dedication to Free Software? Would you say Fedora is a Apache based project because Apache is the default webserver application? Rather then looking at which is the best or superior desktop environment and should thus be default for the Fedora distribution, which is the most unlikely way of how the default desktop environment is going to change, we've seen initiatives at giving the user more and cleaner options to choose from either available DE, but it seems fans from either side continue to struggle with the sorting, positioning, default radio button selection and stuff like that possibly giving one DE more chance of being selected by the user then another DE. But letting the user choose right in the beginning is still just one idea. I'm very interested in learning about new ways and ideas to increase the option value for the users. Spins in this aspect let users experience one DE, or several DEs, and let spin maintainers build the optimal show-case for what such a DE could look like. I think the KDE spin in this regard has been one of the most outstanding examples of building a show-case spin exactly doing what is the purpose of spins to begin with; be a show-case whether it is on a desktop environment or Electronic Labs. > Eventually, the Fedora board will realize that today's conception of > spins is a failed experiment and force this change. I'd encourage > projects based on Fedora to do this voluntarily before this occurs. > Today's conception of spins is not a failed experiment although maybe in your opinion it doesn't meet your personal needs and/or expectations; today's conception of spins is still in continuous development having improved a *lot* since it's first initiation. Tomorrow's conception of spins will likely be better, just like any other thing developing. Maybe I'm supposed to say something clever about KDE 4's recent development history here. Now am I correct to understand you are suggesting that we should differentiate more then calling a Fedora KDE spin just "Fedora KDE Spin", such as by calling it something different, like maybe "Kedora"? Would that not create yet another brand? Would that not move away from Fedora and make *edora sound like *buntu, which has become how many people now refer to the project largely subsidized by Canonical? Kind regards, Jeroen van Meeuwen -kanarip _______________________________________________ design-team mailing list design-team@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team