On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 08:29 -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 12:32:50PM +0000, Richard Hughes wrote: > > 2009/11/19 Naheem Zaffar <naheemzaffar@xxxxxxxxx>: > > > policykit-profile-server > > > policykit-profile-controlled-deployment > > > policykit-profile-personal-desktop > > > > Sure, that's not an insane idea at all. I would imagine most network > > admins worth their salt would be shipping custom PolicyKit overrides > > in F12 anyway. Aim for the desktop use cases on the "Desktop" spin, > > and let other spins change the defaults. > > It makes sense to me for the upstream defaults to be fairly > restrictive, with changes being made downstream in distros (and their > remixes/spins) to loosen those up as needed. In other words, our > desktop package group would include whatever was needed to induce the > desired behavior in the Desktop spin. A good bit of this issue would > need to be addressed upstream though. (Maybe I just repeated what you > said, not sure if I caught the nuance.) This idea comes up a lot - that we can make Fedora packages be uncontroversial raw material, and then make the hard decisions at the spin level. (I'm speaking more generally than this particular issue.) It doesn't work practically: configuration for packages needs to live with the package. Putting gigantic amounts of configuration into the %post of a kickstart file quickly becomes unmanageable. And the idea that we make configuration changes in the %post of the kickstart really falls part badly once people start upgrading their install to the next version of Fedora. It doesn't work statistically: people in general don't get upset about decisions made about the desktop because they aren't using a desktop. They get upset because they *are* using a desktop and have a different vision for that detail. It doesn't work out conceptually: you can't escape having to make decisions. If the only vision we have is how the Desktop spin works, then what policy goes into the package? Practically speaking it will be the configuration that was designed for the desktop spin, with various random changes and missing pieces where people yelled a lot on fedora-devel-list. That's not a coherent operating system. (And it's a bad basis for spins other than the Desktop spin.) - Owen -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
