On Thu, 2014-01-30 at 16:08 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > > Given the tension between the definition of a "Workstation Product" and > > the multiple desktop spins that I've identified on devel@ - i.e. that a > > "Workstation product" built around a single desktop occupies the > > 'desktop space', without accounting for alternative desktops - do you > > definitely want to go ahead with the model where the WS product is > > specifically associated with a single desktop and makes no attempt to > > somehow 'include' alternative desktops, or is it worth considering > > possible approaches that somehow account for alternatives? I realize it > > might be quite late to do that, but it seemed worth asking the question. > > The PRD already has a section that speaks to working with various > toolkits to make them inter-operate with each other. The idea behind > that is so that applications from various toolkits have the same > look-and-feel on the Workstation regardless of their primary > DE/toolkit. While I realize that isn't specifically answering your > question, it does at least speak to the fact that there isn't ONE > TOOLKIT TO RULE THEM ALL. The bit of the PRD that seems significant is "The Workstation working group will define a set of packages that are considered required be installed in order for the system to qualify as a Fedora Workstation. Through policy users will be strongly advised against uninstalling any of these packages and there will also be no option in the graphical software installer to uninstall them." I was kinda reading that as essentially mandating that the default desktop must be installed. It doesn't preclude installing another alongside it, but the effect seems to be to define a standard environment which is always going to be assumed and prioritized. > As to whether we want Workstation to be a "pick your own DE" product, > I personally don't feel that's a great way to start. Seems somewhat > confusing. There's a lot of work to be done, and having a single > underlying toolkit/platform to work from at least helps to focus on > where the initial work goes. I also don't think it excludes the > possibility of different Workstation DEs in the future. If we'd like > to rephrase as "initial Workstation DE" to allow for that possibility, > I'm OK with that. That wasn't necessarily what I was suggesting, it was more of an open suggestion than a specific implementation idea. There are probably approaches that don't involve the "Workstation product" per se being a choose-your-own-adventure, but somehow allow for the existence of alternatives. I think someone floated the idea of some kind of sub-product system already, for instance. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
