-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 05/22/2014 08:04 AM, Elad Alfassa wrote: > On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Stephen Gallagher > <sgallagh@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:sgallagh@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > > We should probably arrange it so that both the Workstation and > Server products follow the same approach for dealing with comps. > > > Absolutely. Care to ask the Server WG how are they going to name > their comps? I know it sounds like bikeshedding, but we can't > really proceed without a name, and changing the name later might be > problematic. > > I think that the most ideal setup would be to have one group named > fedora-workstation and another named fedora-server. > I agree with you. I'll propose it to the Server WG and get back to you. > > In my ideal world, it would be possible during a net install for us > to have a single high-level package selection in Anaconda that > was: > > * Fedora Workstation * Fedora Server * Fedora Custom (Leading to > the traditional dialogs). > > Thoughts? > > > In my opinion we don't need to change the current Anaconda UI like > you're suggesting: Workstation will be installed from Live where > you don't have package selection, while Server will be installed > (probably) from DVD. We can have the DVD default to Server, and > people could still change it in the current Anaconda software > selection, or however the Server WG wants to handle this. > That's one approach, but do you really want to disallow the possibility of installing Workstation from a network tree? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlN99UgACgkQeiVVYja6o6NDEQCggJNlR4f8FvmqledTt+WXg3DS njgAnjr8BL98oKiOZ24wDRXi50YX3NzM =uwo7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
