My take away from the discussion so far is that the current board would not accept anything that 'automates' access to such external software. Doesn't matter if we ship the metadata on the ISO or not. The only thing that I can see flying with the current board is a system that is 'blind' to what it is offering, just like a web browser. Christian ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Richard Hughes" <hughsient@xxxxxxxxx> > To: "Discussions about development for the Fedora desktop" <desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Friday, January 24, 2014 11:48:59 AM > Subject: Re: Fedora board vote and way forward > > On 24 January 2014 10:39, Christian Schaller <cschalle@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Yeah, for the installer it will be a bit hard to proceed atm, > > but there are of course a lot of other aspects to the PRD we > > can flesh out. > > Sure. Given we're so close to the UI freeze for F21 we'll have to > either punt this to F22, but I think that's fine unless F21 turns out > to be a long time coming. > > > I will check with legal if there are any implications in turning the > > software app into a application that searches the web for Fedora sofware > > as opposed to a front-end to specific repositories. > > It might be as simple as just getting the software center to download > something like this at runtime: > https://github.com/hughsie/fedora-appstream/blob/master/appstream-extra/twitter.xml > -- i.e. it's metadata, but metadata that's downloaded at runtime > rather than shipped with the package. That example is a web-app, so no > repo configuration is present, but it would be fairly easy to add a > EULA text and some repo parameters to that XML format. > > Richard > -- > desktop mailing list > desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
