On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 7:25 AM, Kalev Lember <kalevlember@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 05/29/2014 09:24 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: >> On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Michael Cronenworth <mike@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Elad Alfassa wrote: >>>> Personally I think having virtualization that works out-of-the-box is an >>>> excellent selling point and we should keep gnome-boxes (and libvirt) by >>>> default. >>> >>> >>> Could you provide a reasoning that isn't based on opinion? Based on the WS >>> PRD and other wiki pages virtualization isn't covered by "providing a >>> platform for development of various types of applications." >> >> Read use-cases 2 and 3 of the PRD. Virtualization is highlighted there. > > Yes, it's in the PRD and I very much agree that virtualization and > well-working gnome-boxes is a must have. But that doesn't mean we have > to install everything by default. Not any more, now that we have a > working application installer. > > In contrary, I would say that we should install _less_ apps by default > and instead make sure those extra apps are properly advertised in the > application installer and tested and supported. > > In the past we needed to install a lot of apps by default to overcome > the shortcomings of the installer. This is no longer the case. > > Even though we are putting more emphasis and developer effort into > producing a good platform for app developers, it doesn't mean we aren't > still producing a distro for general consumption. And I'd say that > people who need virtualization are more than capable of installing an > additional app for that. But people who don't are likely going to find a > Boxes launcher confusing. I disagree. We aren't targeting people that find virtualization to be a confusing concept. Workstation is targeting developers and students with a reasonable degree of technical competence. I believe working virt out of the box should be installed. > In general, what I'd like to ship by default is a good base platform. A > platform that has enough applications and tools to cover the most common > use cases: web browsing, email, document editing; one that supports most > common file formats. And most importantly, it needs to come with > _excellent_ tools for installing additional applications. I think that describes what the existing desktop spin was aiming for, not what Workstation is setting out to do. Or, more specifically, what you describe is indeed a good base platform and Workstation is a superset of that. >> Space really isn't an issue at the moment. > > I disagree with that statement. Space and the number of packages always > comes with a cost. Sure, it probably won't matter that much for the > initial installation as long as it's going to fit on a 2 GB USB stick, > but it can matter for updates. Having more packages means updates take > longer to install; more downtime while the offline updater runs. Also > more packages means more frequent updates, which can be frustrating for > users if they are nagged about updating apps they never ever use. The live iso is ~1.2 GB right now. In the context of having space to fit libvirt/kvm, it's fine. As for updates, I agree there are too many. josh -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
