Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 12:58:32AM -0400, Jens Petersen wrote:
>> > * Fedora Workstation
>> Will this subsume Live-Desktop.iso and Live-KDE.iso?
>> What about other current desktop Spins?
>> Presumably some of these might have a secondary WG.
>
> Right -- one of the key things we need to do is work on the infrastructure
> for building these products in general, and make that infrastructure
> available to SIGs for possible products outside the initial primary ones.
But the current spins will become even more second-class citizens than they
are right now, whereas 2 spins of dubious value to our real-world users
(Server and Cloud) get featured instead. (How many people will really use
those?) The "Workstation" (hidden GNOME) monoculture is also a completely
unchanged continuation of the "Desktop" (hidden GNOME) monoculture with just
a new name (a name which is all the sillier considering that most Fedora
users are home users). The addition of 2 non-desktop spins is only a lame
attempt at papering over that GNOME monopoly.
The selection of the 3 "Products" makes the whole concept of Products and
Working Groups worthless and counterproductive. The selection of Products
should have been based on the existing successful spins, and the Working
Groups formed from the existing SIGs.
>> What about the main toolchain, devel languages, and X/Wayland, etc?
>> Would they fit in here too, or would they be covered by FESCo?
>
> They'd fit somewhere else -- roughly where they always have been. There is
> an idea for something like "the Fedora Commons", except we can't call it
> that because that name is taken by the _other_ Fedora (the digital
> repository software).
Fedora Core? ;-)
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
