Dave Airlie wrote: > On Fri, 2009-04-24 at 17:40 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: >> See, the Desktop team has no say in whether or not a graphical mixer is >> available in Fedora. The middle ground between reverting the mixer >> feature all together and leaving at is it is having a graphical mixer >> installed by default available in the menus. That was the compromise. > > The mandate is for both Desktop/LiveCD spin and Fedora default install, > surely the Desktop team does decide for the desktop/livecd spin, but not > or the Fedora install. Since I'm sure the KDE spin won't want to include > either of these. > Jesse was replying to this: > A compromise works best if both parties are on board. I don't believe > that the desktop guys will object to the package existing and being > installable if people want. In that context he's saying that "the package existing and being installable" is not something that the Desktop team has a say over. So saying that they wouldn't block that from happening is not a compromise. It's how things would have been without a compromise. -Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
