Dennis Gilmore (dennis@xxxxxxxx) said: > Meeting started by pknirsch at 15:00:59 UTC. The full logs are available > at > http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2013-11-08/fedora_base_design_working_group.2013-11-08-15.00.log.html Apologies for not making the meeting. Some comments > * LINK: http://fpaste.org/52688/38392758/ (pknirsch, 16:19:54) > * Base definition: installer, compose tools, minimal install (for some > definition there), and functionality the majority products want to > use (pknirsch, 16:21:30) My concern with this, as a base design, is that the current implementation of anaconda leads to a dependency tree that is *not* small; it's much larger than the minimal install, as it extends to storage tools, NetworkManager, graphical toolsets, and other items. (You could even arguably pull in X and in the future wayland.) It's not a *bad* thing to have as a base design - I could make the argument that changes in that base (NM, X, etc.) are all things that should be coordinated as a layer under the separate products. But it does give a wider area of coverage than may be expected. (Also, stabilizing the build dependencies therein. Wheee.) Bill -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
