Hello,
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 4:20 AM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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).
No, the intent was very much to change what the resulting desktop
prioritizes. Quite a few FESCo members would be rather disappointed
if the new Workstation ended up just an unchanged GNOME[1].
> The addition of 2 non-desktop spins is only a lame
> attempt at papering over that GNOME monopoly.
No, we are not adding 2 new products and all that extra work just to
make GNOME look better. That would be an extreme amount of work to
tackle a PR issue, and it couldn't even work, as this thread shows.
> 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.
The move to 3 products was intended to be a real change, not a
relabeling of the things we already do. The fact that we don't have a
successful server SIG/spin was seen as a problem that needs to be
fixed, not as a reason to continue avoiding server uses.
Mirek
[1] As opposed to any of 1) non-GNOME, 2) GNOME changed by Fedora, 3)
GNOME upstream changing. I don't know enough to say whether any of
these variants is generally preferred within FESCo.
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
