Re: Fedora.NEXT Products and the fate of Spins

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On Jan 30, 2014 3:06 AM, "Frank Murphy" <frankly3d@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 18:58:22 -0500
> Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > I consider myself squarely in the middle of those two camps.  I think
> > they have value to people.  I think they fill a niche, however large
> > or small it might be.  I also think they can be done by the people
> > wishing to provide them without relying on Fedora resources for
> > hosting and creation (outside of leveraging existing packages and
> > repositories).
>
> That doesn't sound right,
> logically below would also be true.
> Gnome is a fairly big Spin,
> and can eat up quite a lot of resources.
> Maybe it should be outsourced.

I'm going to assume you mean the Desktop spin here.  If the Fedora project decided to use some other DE as the default offering, then sure there could be a GNOME spin hosted elsewhere.

There's a difference between a spin and the primary thing the project ships.

josh

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux