On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > None the less, I do not believe it is "FUD" or in any way inaccurate > to say that this will mean that Fedora will be losing a freedom it > once had— the freedom to make forks at no cost which are technically > equal to the projects, ones which are just as compatible and easy to > install. Sorry to disappoint here but that was never the case ... creating a fork always has been associated with costs ... time, effort, money (yes you need infrastructure, hardware ...) So this rises by 99$ if you want an out of the box installation experience equal to fedora. By not supporting secure boot (which seems is what you are proposing) you are making it worse for *everyone* how is that "more freedom". Sure it is worse then what we currently have but your proposed way is *worse* then both . Worse out of the box installation experience for the "unskilled user", effectively leaving the x86 market entirely to MS (and other vendors that chose to implement secure boot). -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
