-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 03/05/2014 09:20 AM, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 8:48 AM, Stephen Gallagher > <sgallagh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 >> >> On 03/04/2014 09:20 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: >>> This with my Personal Opinion hat on, not representing QA: >>> >>> I'm not sure all/most people who actually want to use Fedora >>> KDE are likely to be sold on doing it by downloading what they >>> will see as 'GNOME', installing that, and then installing KDE >>> on top of it. I think this will be fine for some folks, but >>> there'll be a significant constituency which just wants a KDE >>> image. >>> >>> In fact we might be creating a bit of a problem, because I can >>> see both "want KDE as an alternative desktop on top of the >>> Workstation product" and "just want Fedora KDE" as two entirely >>> legitimate and viable constituencies, which sort of means we've >>> just created a bunch of extra work for ourselves. I'm not sure >>> I see a clever magical solution to that, though. Engage brain >>> cells... >>> >> >> I'd suggest that for the Fedora Workstation, we declare that KDE >> is release-blocking *as an optional component atop the >> Workstation*. > > Please explain this further. Having an optional component be > release blocking is making my head hurt. What I mean is that if I boot the live media, install from it and select "KDE" during that install process, then having a usable system after the post-install reboot is blocking. Is that more clear? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlMXM50ACgkQeiVVYja6o6MsfQCcCgZ4UR80iI1d/WerzYQaPlMK UrQAmgOmzsNwx6lIEa7CTxJIQQPzeJtb =Z+7b -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
