Proposed changes: Under Target Audience, General, after "Desktop apps should be sufficient to make this system the user's only computer," insert a new paragraph: "Developers are not expected to be familiar with the terminal. Users should not be required to use the terminal for essential tasks, including software development." Under Target Audience, Other users, replace the first sentence with "While our focus is on creating a top-class developer workstation, our developer focus will not compromise the aforementioned goal to be a polished and user friendly system that can appeal to a wide general audience." Replace the final sentence with "We will welcome feedback and requests from all our users and will consider accommodating it when possible." Under Develop application guidelines and designs, replace the entire section with "Fedora Workstation follows the GNOME Human Interface Guidelines. These guidelines are mandatory for applications that are installed by default. Third-party software developers are encouraged to follow them too." Under Delivery Mechanism, replace the final sentence with "The product will be offered for installation via either live or netinstall ISO images." Under Packaging for the Workstation", remove the sentence "No software will be blocked from being packaged as long as it doesn't break any part of the core workstation system upon install," or remove the packaging committee that enforces our quality standards. :) Comments on other sections: Robust Upgrades: "Upgrading the system multiple times through the upgrade process should give a result that is the same as an original install of Fedora Workstation. Upgrade should be a safe and process that never leaves the system needing manual intervention." We violated this rule quite badly for the upgrade from F21 to F22. For example, the default font on ttys is different for fresh installs than for upgrades, and fresh installs use xorg-x11-drv-libinput whereas upgrades do not. I still agree with Owen that this is a desirable goal, so maybe we can keep it as-is and just accept that we haven't made progress on it yet. Better upgrade/rollback control: We haven't really made progress on this, either. I want to add a section specifying that regular updates should follow similar QA policies as releases (we can clump the updates together into monthly updates packs), but I guess that might be controversial. I'm not sure about the Work Model section. It doesn't seem to accurately reflect how we operate. "The working group will also regularly meet with a designated representative of Red Hat to discuss how Red Hats product and development plans will affect the Fedora product development and resource allocation." I guess we don't need to remove this per se, since Christian kind of fills that role, but it also doesn't seem to accurately reflect how we operate. -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
