Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> The constructiveness if for KDE SIG and individuals to accept that his
> claim of "perfect integration" is silly when there are many gaps to
> address.
Those gaps are not integration issues. They're just features which GNOME
happens to have.
> I have no problems with that except for the concern that users who are
> completely new to Linux don't understand jargon like GNOME or KDE. It
> means nothing and I think download page isn't going to the right place
> to do it. I would like to see a good proposal, perhaps a mockup showing
> us how it can be done instead of voting in FESCo.
Just link to an info page for each.
> Why single out desktop environments? Is the justifications for all of
> our defaults documented anywhere? Shouldn't it be?
Default apps are basically implied by the desktop environment (we ship apps
designed for the respective spin's desktop environment).
> I think, the amount of resources within Fedora directed at one desktop
> environment is a big factor and it does make a significant difference in
> the end user experience when new technologies developed within Fedora.
And I think the amount of resources directed towards KDE is sufficient
(though as I wrote repeatedly, more help would be perfectly welcome).
>> And, the answers to these questions will only get more important over
>> time, it seems, as more and more viable alternatives arise (within
>> Fedora), like sugar, XFCE, LXDE, etc...
>
> .. and this makes it even more important to make the right decision.
> Would it be right to provide a long list of desktop environments and
> live cd's associated within the download page or upfront within the
> installer?
Yes.
> How do you even describe the differences appropriately?
Just link to info pages.
Kevin Kofler
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
