On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 9:51 PM, Elad Alfassa <elad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi all. > > Since apparently we can't remove anything from default without having a > "policy", and we can't ask packagers to fix their software either, I have to > write this message. > > Apparently, not including a package by default is seen as "punishment". So, > instead of doing actual work on bugfixing or debugging Fedora 21, or working > on our website so it'll be ready for release time, I have to write this > email message. I assumed the whole idea of Fedora.Next was to reduce > bureaucracy and making sure we ship a high quality product. Apparently, I > was wrong, and the point of Fedora.next seems to be *increasing* bureaucracy > and having to discuss and write a policy for every one line commit we do. > > If you are out of the loop of the recent events, look at this bug: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1131248 > > --------- > Now, enough bitter sarcasm, here is my draft: > > In the following policy, I differentiate between "app launcher" and "app". > An "app launcher" is a desktop file+icon that is shown in the application > view, clicking on it would launch the app. > An "app" is an application as defined by the GNOME 3 HIG (link TBD when HIG > is published) > > As always in policies, mandatory items are marked with the words "must" and > "must not", the rest is nice-to-have. > > App launchers in Fedora workstation *must*: > * Have a unique 64x64 launcher icon (the same icon MUST NOT be used for one > default launcher). 64x64 is too small for high dpi screens (its the same as 32x32 for non hidpi screen) if "64x64" is your aim ask for 128x128. -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
